From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. While the keep votes presented some good arguments, they were not enough to sway those participating in the discussion. ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:45, 5 June 2017 (UTC) reply

DeAnna Johnson

DeAnna Johnson (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet notability criteria. Whilst there are a lot of websites referenced, they comprise at most local coverage, a selection of fan sites, own website etc. I can find no evidence of significant coverage in third party reliable sources --- PageantUpdater ( talk) 17:34, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 18:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 18:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 18:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 18:14, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply
  • Keep -- I didn't create this page, but ran across it and spent time filling out the details as requested on the banner. (1) I can find more than local coverage of the basketball, volleyball, and softball Georgia state championships that Johnson was involved in but they may not mention her name to prove that she was part of the championship teams. Only the local papers usually do that, as is well understood. (2) There are lots of equal or lesser contestants from The Voice who have their own Wikipedia page but Johnson is much more notable in terms of providing a role model for the young citizens of Georgia. Both the Georgia Senate and House wrote resolutions recognizing Johnson's achievements in entertainment and pageantry and a Wikipedia page provides an easily found record of this. (3) I am fascinated by individuals that excel at competitions with such high visibility and it is rare to find ones that do it across areas -- sports, singing, & pageantry. I spent only a few hours working on this page and am sure others will contribute as well. JefferShip ( talk) 19:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply
  • Delete I looked for independent sources, did not find any. While her previously mentioned diversity of accomplishments is impressive, she does not appear to have any third party notability, nor does she meet any of the criteria for presuming notability. She fails WP:NSPORT. While she was Miss Georgia USA, the majority of other Miss [State] winners did not have Wikipedia pages, so I assume she is not notable on that front. Most of the other members of season 8 of the voice do not have wikipedia pages either. The combination of three non-notable things does not make her notable, nor does the fact that the Georgia senate wrote a 10 line recommendation for her. -William ( talk) 20:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC) reply
    • Has notability for music according to guidelines WP:MUSIC -- two entries in the Billboard Hot Christian Songs chart, at #5 and #14 as cited on page. JefferShip ( talk) 04:43, 5 June 2017 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Some of the coverage seems to be substantial and independent enough to go past the WP:N. Local coverage does not stop notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graeme Bartlett ( talkcontribs) 09:03, 28 May 2017 (UTC) reply
    • All the recent pageant titleholder AFDs over the past year would suggest otherwise, that local coverage alone is not enough to establish notability. I've lost count of how many similar articles have been deleted because there was not significant coverage outside local papers. And we're not talking local community papers (as in the sourcing here) either, I'm talking about arguments being made that papers like the Kansas City Star are too local to establish notability for a Miss Missouri USA titleholder. The Baxley News Banner and fan sites don't cut it. --- PageantUpdater ( talk) 07:04, 28 May 2017 (UTC) reply
    • I do work in probability & statistics and find that this combination of beauty and talent is quite rare. What are the odds of one person being in the top ranks of a singing competition, a beauty competition, and capturing state titles in each of the seasonal team sports? The Voice competition is remarkable in that her looks didn't enter in getting a four-chair turn. Yet complementarily, the Miss USA competition did not feature a talent portion. Statistically these are considered independent orthogonal factors and so the odds need to be multiplied leading to heightened notability. That's just math to see that performance talent and beauty need to add. Plus, I need to challenge the fact that Season 8 contestants aren't represented in Wikipedia. When I checked the Season 8 Voice page, I counted 6 of the Top 9 contestants as having links. Including DeAnna, there are Sawyer Fredericks, Korrine Hawthorne, Kimberley Nichole, Meghan Linsey, and Joshua Davis. DeAnna was in the Top 9. Precedent has been set and that is why I added all that info to her page -- I know it doesn't matter to the decision but I wouldn't have wasted my time if I didn't think that DeAnna's last 4 years in continuous public spotlight didn't merit notability. BTW, whoever created the page initially got her middle name wrong, and that's what got me going on this path in the first place! So many people ask about DeAnna's age and her height that her Wikipedia entry will be accessed for that alone. There are examples of Voice contestants that have referred to her persistence as motivating them to try out. That supports the position that she is a role model and a muse to lots of people worldwide. JefferShip ( talk) 14:24, 28 May 2017 (UTC) reply
    • From WP:N guidelines: Notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time. ... If reliable sources cover a person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having a biographical article on that individual. Objectively, DeAnna has had continuous public exposure over the years 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017 in separate events and may likely continue this high-profile pattern. JefferShip ( talk) 15:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Winning a state-level beauty pageant is not sufficient for notability, and neither is being an unsuccessful contestant on The Voice. Combining them doesn't help. Power~enwiki ( talk) 05:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC) reply
    • arbitrariness - pointed out by others that many "unsuccessful" Voice singers have pages, such as Naia Kete and Pip (musician) not even finishing in the top 10, yet are not marked for deletion. I don't think there is an objective criteria that someone can apply when helping to fill out an entry. The more notable things that a candidate does, like in DeAnna's case, the more time is wasted if she does get deleted. That's what's called a perverse incentive according to the Wikipedia entry. JefferShip ( talk) 19:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. being less than notable in three different fields adds up to less than notable. Having an actual national award in any one of them is what would make someone notable. DGG ( talk ) 23:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC) reply
    • National award like an Emmy? She has two national high school championships in team sports as cited on her page (you did ask for an actual national award). Otherwise requiring a national award seems too narrow and restrictive a guideline. JefferShip ( talk) 04:43, 5 June 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.