Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Beauty pageants

Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Beauty pageants. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Beauty pageants|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Beauty pageants. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from August 2016) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Beauty pageants

[edit]

Natálie Puškinová

[edit]
Natálie Puškinová (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One sentence, No citations. Tankishguy 14:07, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep she is the winner of Big 4 pageant. Working on the article to add more sources. Newklear007 (talk) 16:34, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Minas Gerais

[edit]
Miss Grand Minas Gerais (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:26, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:42, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Cantabria

[edit]
Miss Grand Cantabria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appears to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:SPAM (Advertisements masquerading as articles) operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:23, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I think that the 1 November Miss Grand nominations should be withdrawn to save editor time while discussion continues at WP:COIN. I have found 451 articles about Miss Grand, so if articles need to be nominated for deletion, then a bundled list is probably appropriate. TSventon (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Given the number of pay walled foreign language sources cited, I am finding it impossible to fairly evaluate this article. I'm seeing a lot of unsubstantiated claims in the nomination. For example, the nominator stated "Many claims are unreferenced" but the entire article has inline citations throughout; so that statement clearly isn't accurate. The nominator has claimed there are false citations but without providing examples. (I wasn't able to find any but again there are paywalled materials used that I could not access). The nominator also made a claim of WP:PROMO but the text itself is neutral in tone without stating anything other then neutral facts such as when and where the pageant was held, who won, etc. It does not contain promotional language, makes no puffery statements, and has zero peacock words. In short, I'm not seeing anything blatantly promotional in the text at all. Absent a WP:SIRS table analysis, and absent any evaluation of this topic in relation to WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT I'm not seeing a valid deletion argument (particularly when we have citations to paywalled reputable media). What I do see is a bunch of unsubstantiated accusations. The nominator is going to have to do a lot better than that to make their case, and preferably minus the accusatory tone and with specific evidence such a source analysis.4meter4 (talk) 22:33, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @4meter4 and Cortador: unfortunately the nominator seems to be a new editor and hasn't edited since the 1 November. I had a look at the sourcing for this article, as it was the first of the group of Miss Grand nominations. All the sources are online and linked to an archive, which is available without a paywall and I was able to set the browser to translate from Spanish to English. In my opinion, the references do not show that Miss Grand Cantabria has received significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

TSventon (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it fails WP:ORGCRIT a redirect to Miss Grand Spain#Regional pageants would be an acceptable WP:ATD. I would be ok with that.4meter4 (talk) 20:29, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Georgia

[edit]
Miss Grand Georgia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appears to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:26, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 23:09, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand La Rioja

[edit]
Miss Grand La Rioja (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 23:14, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Euskadi

[edit]
Miss Grand Euskadi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:19, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Navarra

[edit]
Miss Grand Navarra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:19, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Zaragoza

[edit]
Miss Grand Zaragoza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:16, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Catalonia

[edit]
Miss Grand Catalonia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appears to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:16, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:20, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Galicia

[edit]
Miss Grand Galicia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 20:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation.Thomson Walt (talk) 01:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Extremadura

[edit]
Miss Grand Extremadura (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 20:41, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation.Thomson Walt (talk) 02:00, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Toledo

[edit]
Miss Grand Toledo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Paraná

[edit]
Miss Grand Paraná (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 20:41, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:24, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Las Palmas

[edit]
Miss Grand Las Palmas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:24, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Asunción

[edit]
Miss Grand Asunción (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:43, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 20:41, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Abruzzo

[edit]
Miss Grand Abruzzo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 20:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Apulia

[edit]
Miss Grand Apulia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:42, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Grand Madrid

[edit]
Miss Grand Madrid (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Articles related to Miss Grand International appear to be a massive WP:PROMO and Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation. This is one of them, and there are many others. The problem pattern, described below, applies to most of the articles related to Miss Grand International.

Many claims are unreferenced and cannot be corroborated by google searches. Unreferenced claims to not belong on Wikipedia, but problems go beyond that. The unreferenced claims indicate that people associated with the event (the ones who know the event from inside) are actually creating the articles. Covert promotion. Furthermore, many references DO NOT support the statements they purport to support. Oftentimes, the claim on Wikipedia is not featured in the reference in any form. There are many single-purpose accounts and that single purpose is to create promo articles related to Miss Grand International. Some, like User: InternationalPageant, are already banned. Permanently banned. Others aren’t and continue their Wikipedia:Spam#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles operation.

These articles chip at the quality and reliability of Wikipedia itself. WP:TNT should be the response. University of The Purple Unicorn (talk) 18:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is a discussion alleging that I have a conflict of interest with the pageant Here. However, I believe that any conclusion regarding this deletion request, as well as other articles I have created that were nominated by him/her, should be based on the sources I provide in each proposed article, not on such an allegation. Thomson Walt (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. This is part of a series of sloppy nominations made by University of The Purple Unicorn. Several of the claims made in the opening statement are not applicable to this article. For example, this article uses inline citations throughout, so the claim that there are unsourced statements isn't true. I was also unable to find any false citations in this article as claimed by the nominator in what appears to be a copy pasted nomination used in many nominations and done without thought or care for each individual article nominated. The article also contains no promotional next (ie zero peacock words, no puffery statements, etc.) so WP:PROMO doesn't appear applicable. Given that the nominator has not engaged at all with WP:SIGCOV or WP:ORGCRIT, and has not obviously even looked at the materials in this particular article (or they would have modified their opening nomination) I am voting keep. We shouldn't be encouraging article nominations done en masse that aren't done with due diligence (ie doing a WP:BEFORE, accurately summarizing the state of the article in the nomination, etc).4meter4 (talk) 02:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 02:40, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

[edit]