Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isis Finlay

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:52, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Isis Finlay

[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)

I am not convinced of Finlay's notability. There is no SNG for beauty pageant winners, so unfortunately we have to use the WP:GNG or else WP:ENT.

I searched the following areas and did not come up with any substantive content about Finlay, aside from her obituary.

The usual Google, GNews, GBooks, GScholar
Archive.org (metadata, text, and archived websites)
Cuban Heritage Collection Digital Collections, University of Miami
Library of Congress
Digital Collections - The Cuban Revolution at Yale
Granma Archives Index
Miami Herald archives (obituary from here)

Newspapers.com shows a number of routine exact-duplicate paragraph-length reports from July 1954, reporting that she won Miss Cuba, with others mentioning that she was competing in Miss Universe. I would argue that routine coverage of that nature, limited to the time around the event, does not satisfy WP:N, which requires coverage to be over a significant length of time. (Especially since these were almost all duplicates, presumably from a news agency, which means they aren't really independent of one another). In essence, Finlay is a WP:BLP1E - she won Miss Cuba once and then never really made the news again. I don't think that qualifies her for notability by our standards. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cuba-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think she is notable for of winning Miss Cuba and for being in Miss Universe. Carole King Johnson, Miss USA 1955 and Charlotte Scheffield, Miss USA 1957 only reference is their Obits; so what makes them notable if not winning Miss USA and participating in Miss Universe? Or are Miss USA winners more notable than Miss Cuba? Forgive me if I entered this incorrectly but I have not made an entry in Wikipedia in a few years. Callelinea (talk) 21:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Callelinea, I think you meant Carlene King Johnson and Charlotte Sheffield, if I'm not mistaken (just so anyone looking at the comment can see the links). "Other articles exist" is a common argument to make at AfD, but it's important to judge every article by its own merits and not by those of other articles. For what it's worth, I agree that the sourcing on those two articles is not great, and if there's nothing else for them, they should probably also be deleted - but that's an argument to have at their AfDs, not this one.

Something difficult about articles for pageant winners is that, as I mentioned in my nomination, there's no specific notability guideline (SNG) for them - nothing that tells us, "the winners of Pageant X are presumed notable, the winners of Pageant Y are not", etc. So we have to fall back on the general notability guideline (GNG). Possibly a case could be made for using the criteria for entertainers (ENT) to judge her by.

In Ms. Finlay's case, I couldn't find very much in-depth independent coverage of her, which leads me to believe she doesn't qualify under the GNG. I also found no evidence that she meets the criteria for entertainers (Significant roles in multiple notable productions, large fan base or a significant "cult" following, or unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment).

If you disagree, the best thing to do is locate in-depth reliable sources that would show that she passes GNG or ENT, which would mean the article should be kept. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 11:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:35, 19 June 2018 (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.