Miss Grand International – Reduce protection to ECP. I could probably get away with calling this any of Endorse, No Consensus, or Unprotect, but instead of any of those, I'm going to be a little creative. I'll change the protection on Miss Grand International (currently a redirect) to ECP. That will allow the nom to edit it. If somebody wants to try a version in draft space, I assume all the AfC reviewers are EC, so they'll be able to accept a draft as well. But, given the extensive deletion and socking history, I think we still need some level of protection to cut down on the abuse. I noticed that there's a 1900-revision deleted history. I don't see any reason to restore all that, but if somebody else feels the need, go for it. -- RoySmith(talk)14:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.
I'm starting this DRV not to challenge the closure of the previous discussion, but to gauge whether there is consensus to allow re-creation of Miss Grand International as a standalone article, as significant new information has come to light since the 2017 AfD, per WP:DRVPURPOSE #3. The title, as well as Miss Grand Thailand, currently redirects to Miss Grand, where they are jointly covered, but the main in-depth references in the article are about Miss Grand Thailand, and it seems best to split the Miss Grand article and cover these subjects separately. Requests to recreate Miss Grand International have been rejected due to the previous AfD result, necessitating this DRV. I am neutral on the issue. (If the outcome is to allow re-creation, I'll split the content currently in Miss Grand to Miss Grand Thailand and Miss Grand International.) Paul_012 (talk) 04:39, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As I have mentioned at a recent related AfD, "there has been plenty of English-language coverage of the international pageant, mostly focused on the controversies it's generated (The Independent, Mic.com, Khaosod English, Stuff.co.nz). There's also coverage of the pageant's support of a Myanmar contestant's anti-coup protests (The Diplomat, Khaosod English, Eleven Myanmar)." However, they do not go into particularly in-depth detail about the pageant's operations, and I'm not sure whether they'd satisfy the GNG. Other sources like Rappler provide more detail,[1][2] but aren't written in particularly journalistic tone (I'm not familiar enough with the Philippines' media landscape to judge their reliability). --Paul_012 (talk) 04:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC) Updated 13:53, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DRV colleagues should note the previous DRV for Miss Grand in January of this year, here. I would be minded to say that the best way to cover this material would be to create a subsection of Miss Grand for this content. After reviewing the proposed sources, I don't feel that there's enough sourceable material to justify a separate article.—S MarshallT/C12:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think S Marshall hasit exactly right. The most likely way to keep the appropriate amount of this material is as a subsection of the main article. As I said at the previous DRV, " the goal is to find a way towards an article if an article is possible" -- that's for the main article, and for this one, it translates as , " the goal is to find a way keeping the content if it is possible" DGG ( talk ) 00:06, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The article Miss Grand was recently deleted and salted by Dodger67 under G4. It was not tagged as {{db-g4}} by any other user at the time of the deletion. I was deleting related redirects until I stumbled upon two that triggered pop-up notices cautioning me of two fully protected pages—Miss Grand International and Miss Grand International 2020—before realizing this DRV was taking place. Not sure what is the best way to proceed with the matter. ✗plicit13:08, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.
