Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priyanka Khurana Goyal

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:01, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Priyanka Khurana Goyal

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

Fandom page. Other than her winning a minor pageant, no in-depth coverage to show they pass WP:GNG. Case of WP:BIO1E. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:53, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability. Sources only report her winning the "Mrs India Queen of Substance" and the "Mrs Earth" (not to be confused with Miss Earth) awards (which are hardly notable themselves) in 2015. — Stringy Acid (talk) 20:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weakish Keep. Needs to be rewritten - too positive in tone. She won India queen of substance in February [1], then Mrs Earth in October [2], and has on-going coveraged in 2016 - [3], [4], [5]. Seems she started a smallish fashion company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icewhiz (talk • contribs) 07:15, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did a small cleanup + added a couple of sources.Icewhiz (talk) 07:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from Economic Times, none of the sources cited (Jokatimes, iDiva.com, Freepressjournal.in, DesiBlitz, Hans India) in the article are notable (or even heard of) in India. Thus, the ongoing coverage on her seems to be restricted to little-known online-only magazines. — Stringy Acid (talk) 08:35, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another [6] from Dec 2016. My knowledge of Indian media is not great (all the more so regarding modelling/fashion - the business/news stuff I do know a bit. I do think she is receiving some modest on-going coverage, and should squeak by. The original entry was atrocious (probably copy-pasted from IMI's alumni webpage or newspaper) - the current entry is more balanced.Icewhiz (talk) 14:41, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even this website, wearethecity.in, doesn't look like a reliable source (from their about page, it seems like they were founded in 2008 -- which is hardly enough time to acquire some sort of reputation). The only reliable source in the article is the Economic Times one, but even then, all these sources talk mainly about her winning two (not-so-famous) awards, which as per WP:BLP1E isn't good enough to pass WP:GNG. — Stringy Acid (talk) 15:30, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I won't contest wearethecity.in's notability (you may be quite right), however your reasoning is flawed - plenty of notable sources - e.g. The_Intercept, The Huffington Post, FiveThirtyEight are new. Some of her coverage is of other activties - e.g. a fashion show in London in which she launched a line. And of course, just the on-going coverage shows someone is interested in this. This is definitely not WP:BLP1E - the local Mrs title is distinct from the global Mrs title. The coverage in the more notable source (Economic Times India) is actually from before Mrs Earth - so they actually thought it was noteworthy to cover her as a contestant and not as a global winner. I think she squeaks above the deletion threshold - but this a weak position of mine.Icewhiz (talk) 16:02, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like she's getting some local coverage as well [7] (and from her FB looks like she's appearing in a few events per week - still - 1.5 years after the title).Icewhiz (talk) 16:19, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that my reason for the non-notability of wearethecity.in, was somewhat flawed. However, it's not fair to compare it with websites like FiveThirtyEight and The Intercept, which have received wide coverage by other reputed sources. I'm no expert on beauty pageants, but the global title ("Mrs Earth", not to be confused with Miss Earth) she received doesn't seem to be very notable either -- I count < 30 hits for "Mrs. & Ms. Earth Pageant" on Google. I'll be happy to change my vote to neutral/keep if there are sources that show that the awards she received are notable. — Stringy Acid (talk) 16:43, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Did not meet notability guidelines as per WP:GNG.--Richie Campbell (talk) 00:48, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete not only do we lack any substantial references on the subject, but the pageant is throughouly unnotable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:26, 27 March 2017 (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.