Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Glasscock

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 redirect to RuPaul's Drag Race (season 1). Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:31, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca Glasscock

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable entertainer. Of the three sources cited, I don't know how RS the first one is, but it's an interview, and therefore doesn't establish notability. The second (Nicki Swift) is considered generally unreliable. And the third only provides a brief capsule profile. Search finds nothing even resembling RS sigcov. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ENTERTAINER. Was draftified, but creator moved it back, so here we are. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, Entertainment, and Puerto Rico. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E and for failing WP:SIGCOV. Subject is known only for competing in RuPaul's Drag Race (season 1).4meter4 (talk) 14:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note WP:Interviews is more nuanced than the nom suggests it to be. Jclemens (talk) 15:58, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is true. And I was suggesting what I did, very much in the context of the source and the subject matter. I'm not saying all interviews are useless, but they are all primary sources, and unless there is evidence of journalistic scrutiny and fact-checking standards, I don't see how we can rely on an interview as the main vehicle for establishing notability and verifying statements, as is the case here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:19, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete various hits in Out magazine, "where are they now?" articles, nothing substantial about this person. Oaktree b (talk) 15:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can't find anything outside recaps of their candidacy and small mentions. Several of the sites are paywalled, so don't feel confident saying delete without being able to view the pieces. It doesn't appear their candidacy is enough, nor did they work in other fields that might garner notability. Star Mississippi 18:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Star Mississippi, what candidacy are you talking about? I can't find anything relating to being a candidate for anything in the article. --Kbabej (talk) 20:05, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, poor word choice I guess. What do you call someone who appears on a reality show. Maybe contestant would be better. Thanks for asking. Star Mississippi 21:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Just throwing some extra sourcing out there I've found. It's not a slam dunk. The subject placed top three in her season. She has a three-page entry (pages 107-109) in the book 100 of the Most Influential Gay Entertainers (source here); appeared in Pandora Boxx/Adam Barta's music video for "You Seemed Shady to Me" (source here); and appeared on an episode of the podcast Queening Out with Laganja Estranja (source here). Even searching through every mention on Issuu, that's all the non-interview sourcing I could find. --Kbabej (talk) 20:38, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If appearing as a guest on a podcast helps establish notability, then we are going to be flooded with marginal biographies. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to RuPaul's Drag Race (season 1). I do not see enough evidence of significant coverage from third-party, reliable sources, but I think a redirect would be more helpful than outright deletion as this is a viable search term. I am suggesting this redirect target as I believe this is what they are most well-known for so it would be the most helpful option for readers. Aoba47 (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Hi! Im the creator of this article. Thanks so much, everyone, for your feedback. I’m admittedly a forgetful person, so I have issues especially with sources, checking reliable ones, etc. Whether this article is kept or deleted, thanks for any help that has or will be given here <333 Cornmazes (talk) 12:11, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider Redirect option (in addition to those advocating for Delete)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to RuPaul's Drag Race (season 1), which gives Glasscock the most attention. Brief mentions in other articles are all connected to her appearance in season 1. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:44, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Accidentally clicked JSTOR in the look for sources. Given the discussion in "Xtravaganza!": Drag Representation and Articulation in "RuPaul's Drag Race", I think that may contribute to notability.Naraht (talk) 04:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's a solid source, but I don't think it's significant coverage. The full content about Glasscock is:
- a mention of her and two other contestants as "diverse types of Queens"
- "Rebecca Glasscock is not normalized or corrected during the course of the show; she and the other Queens learn that she is the most ideal in terms of her appearance. Repeatedly through the season, Rebecca is told by many of the judges that she is the most naturally beautiful of the Queens. Though all the competitors are beautiful, Rebecca is the Queen who looks most like a woman; she is most capable of passing."
Overall we have less than WP:100WORDS and it's all still based on season 1 of Drag Race. I could see a few sentences summarizing the source (not just the parts about Glasscock) being due in a (thus far non-existent) §Reception at the season article. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:10, 26 October 2022 (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.