Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Supertalent 2016

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. J04n(talk page) 15:51, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Supertalent 2016

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

There already seems to be a WP article on this event: Miss Supertalent. Both articles have similar sources, which are predominantly made up of press reviews and mentions in their own/partners websites. Aust331 (talk) 10:36, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:32, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:22, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Although I'm not convinced of the notability of the competition itself, it does have an article. And for annual international competitions, we typically also have separate year-specific articles. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but like I mention, the Supertalent article has similar sources to this article, which means that if this one here is not notable, the Supertalent article isn't notable either, and perhaps should also be nominated for deletion. Aust331 (talk) 06:43, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:15, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Response to nominator. If the parent article covers a non-notable topic, then it might have been appropriate to either nominate that one (instead of the instant article) or to bundle them both into a single nomination. But as things stand right now, you're asking us to assume that the parent article is non-notable. I'm not willing to make that assumption when having a discussion on a different article (i.e., this one here). So long as that parent article exists, this year-specific spinout article is acceptable under long-standing community practice. NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:33, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As requested by NewYorkActuary, I have nominated the parent article for deletion: [1]. I have found that both articles Miss Supertalent 2016 and Miss Supertalent do not meet basic notability. Aust331 (talk) 07:47, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a notable pageant and lacks reliable sources from mainstream news media.--Richie Campbell (talk) 02:07, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as I'm not convinced by Keep vote stating that yearly-articles are expected to be kept, as several, and I mean several, of these will have nothing actually convincing for their own article, and thus, if needed, can be mentioned at their closest-related article if at all. This is a case where I'm not seeing convincingly enough to currently suggest keeping. SwisterTwister talk 05:02, 20 July 2016 (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.