Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vivienne Pinay

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 5. This has been open for four weeks and it does not appear that any further relisting would draw additional comment. There is only one detailed !vote for keep, but this does not demonstrate that the subject had "significant roles" (as required in c.1 of WP:ENTERTAINER) rather than just "roles", and there is no refutation regarding the lack of SIGCOV in reliable sources. Goldsztajn (talk) 01:15, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vivienne Pinay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Does not pass GNG. Only piece of independent, in-depth coverage is an interview in "Hotspots Magazine" from 2013. The other source with subject's name in headline is just a recap of a reality TV episode on which the subject was eliminated; it is not in-depth coverage of Vivienne Pinay. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sexuality and gender, Philippines, and Georgia (U.S. state). ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:57, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:09, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:ENTERTAINER. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:18, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  To be clear, you interpret this person’s one-episode guest spot on Skin Wars and their run on RuPaul’s Drag Race to make them a notable entertainer, despite a lack of notability-establishing coverage? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 16:09, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I have asked you several times now to leave me alone. I will not be engaging with you further so please do not ask me questions or post on my talk page again. Thanks ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:42, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That is simply not a reasonable ask when it comes to AfD, and I will not be avoiding your votes in this discussion. You are free to not reply, obviously. Biography subjects need WP:SIGCOV, and this subject does not meet that standard. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This is not a reasonable thing to say in a public AfD discussion. Stockhausenfan (talk) 08:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: In real life the subject is a friend of several friends of mine and, since my partner is Filipino-American, I have found that both the LGBTQ and pinoy worlds are very small and interconnected. So I'm not going to !vote. I feel obligated to point out that the subject was eliminated after the 4th episode of RuPaul's Drag Race, but they also have tens of thousands of followers on social media. Discuss amongst yourselves. Bearian (talk) 18:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to RuPaul's Drag Race season 5. Not prominent enough for stand alone article. Reads like a promo. Ramos1990 (talk) 03:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That redirect makes sense to me too ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Completely disagree. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 12:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 07:07, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I would argue that being a member of the Haus of Edwards in addition to the Drag Race and Skin Wars stint qualify them under the first criteria of WP:NENTERTAINER. I think there's room to give the article a badly needed touchup, but outright deletion may not be called for. If I am misunderstanding NENTERTAINER please clarify. Relm (talk) 01:01, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Opinion is divided between Keep and Redirect. A source review would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:45, 15 April 2025 (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.