Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triple Crown (beauty pageants)

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 Keep. — Coren ^(talk) 00:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disclaimer: non-admin close.

Triple Crown (beauty pageants)

From the article: "In pageantry, the unofficial title Triple Crown winner is bestowed on a woman who wins her state title in each of the Miss Teen USA, Miss USA and Miss America systems." Who bestows this title is not clear, as there do not appear to be any reliable sources discussing it. The term "triple crown" is used to refer to three Miss Commonwealth pageants. Google and Google News Archive searches for "Triple Crown" and "beauty pageant" turn this up. Other Ghits come from the fact that the Miss USA pageant and the Belmont Stakes are televised on the same weekend. There just don't seem to be any sources discussing this particular title. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 18:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - you obviously didn't look hard enough (although you shouldn't have had to, as I should have had these in the article... what a shame I don't have endless time) [1], [2], [3], Kelly Lloyd's pagenat business is called "Triple Crown consulting" after this, [4], [5]. This term is one that is extremely important within beauty pageants because it has only been achieved six times (out of the hundreds who have one two of the titles). Obviously is isn't as notable as Bill Clinton or George W Bush, but Wikipedia has articles on a number of (notable) smaller facets of things where there isn't a clear place the stuff can be merged to and I think this is a good example of that. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 20:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of those, the only two that are reliable sources are the Roanoake Times and (possibly) New York Post. They each use "triple-crown" (uncapitalized) to refer to two of the models, but this does not establish that it is an actual title used by mainstream publications in describing beauty pageant winners. I can accept that this is of interest to hardcore beauty-pageant fans, but that does not make it notable. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 20:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (ec*2) - I trust PageantUpdater will place those sources on the article shortly. As far as who bestows it... the answer is no one and everyone, but basically, the media and general public, because it is an unofficial title. I think that you will find this similarly true for the other Triple Crowns as well. Most of these are all unofficial titles which are used by the media and the general public. This should be sourced and I think that if PU adds these sources as she indicated above this article should stand fine. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) I trust her too. The problem is, the sources don't establish that the term is used by the media or the general public. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 21:35, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If Pageant has located sources, that was my only objection to the article. Nearly every form of competition where awards are made has its standard for a "Triple Crown", whether it's Derby-Preakiness-Belmont or Runs-Average-RBI. Wikipedia has a (soon to be nominated, no doubt) article called Triple Crown. Mandsford 21:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, those other two you mention actually are notable. But that does not meean this one is. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 21:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unsourced, original-research product of one editor's beauty pageant obsession. The "keep" voters' faith that PageantUpdater will somehow gin up references is touching, but based on her history I'd prefer actual fact-based rather than faith-based sourcing for Wikipedia articles. --Calton | Talk 01:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Even if she does have an obsession with this particular topic, surely the suitability of the subject for a Wikipedia article should be judged on its own merits, not her history. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 23:14, 6 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.