The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. While the pageants may be notable, notability is not inherited and the arguments on lack of reliable sources dealing with the company were persuasive. MastCell ^Talk 04:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Future Productions[edit]

Future Productions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable company. The beauty pageants it runs may be notable, but it is not. I couldn't find a single reliable source that discussed it and the only mentions were obvious reprints of press releases ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 18:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - If the beauty pageants are notable, and there are more than a couple (there is) then by default they are notable as the company who puts them together. The pageants are what makes them notable. Being a household name isn't required. Pharmboy 18:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Potential notabilty of pageants does not confer notability on company. No reliable sources found that discuss the company on its own. MikeWazowski 18:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I've been meaning to put these together into one article of the history of Miss USA state directors (for which there are quite a few reliable sources) for a while now but just haven't got around to it. I'll make sure I save this stuff and it can go. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 19:57, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, and throw these other pageant managers in the trash with it. I fail to see the importance of recording the history of pageant management for state pageants. Not notable by WP:CORP. Realkyhick 22:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As most pageants go to higher pageants. Randall O 11:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Randall O[reply]
  • Comment As a side note, why are only Terrans allowed to compete in Miss Universe? Kinda like baseball's World Series I guess. And...it just seems to me that in this case, the notable acts of a relatively unknown company is what makes them notable. Notable does NOT have to mean well known, it means "worthy of notice" per WP:N and it applies. Pharmboy 12:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terrans? Pft. Only humans are allowed to compete! A true "Miss Universe" should allow all species to compete - as long as, I guess, they come from a gendered species. Cos, after all, if it has no gender, how can it be a "Miss"? So, I guess a megalovirus would get left out, but a housecat definitely should be allowed to compete! AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 15:52, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.