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 Miss Thailand. MBisanz ^talk 20:03, 9 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Apantree Prayuttasenee (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Unsourced BLP (created before 18 March 2010). Brianga ( talk) 20:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete article has a total and complete lack of sources. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 08:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 08:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• Comment This is really old. The Thai search term for the article is อภันตรี ประยุทธเสนีย์ . Google search [1] found several match, including a clip [2] from Thai Film Archive. -- Lerdsuwa ( talk) 09:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Old magazines from 1969 with her photo on the cover: Magazine #1 Kwan Ruean [3], Magazine #2 Phadung Silp [4] -- Lerdsuwa ( talk) 10:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC) reply

• Comment: article is no longer an unsourced BLP. Pinging Brianga and Johnpacklambert. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 07:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Still support a delete under WP:BIO for lack of "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Brianga ( talk) 18:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• Keep: National-level major pageant winner from the pre-google era. Adequate indicia of notability. Montanabw ^(talk) 08:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC) reply
• Comment As best as I can tell the sources involve extremely passing mentions of her, nothing to suggest it is enough to pass GNG. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 01:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• If found to not be independently notable, redirect to Miss Thailand as a valid search term, and the subject is mentioned there. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:11, 1 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete as there has been consensus that there's no automatic inheritance of an article for simply being a pageant member; none of this comes close at all for actually establishing independent notability or substance. SwisterTwister talk 05:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep. The magazine covers provided by Lerdsuwa suggest in-depth coverage exists and would be possible to find in a good library. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 07:17, 18 September 2016 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to Miss Thailand as suggested by Northamerica1000. I don't find her to be notable per Wikipedia's standards, but IMO redirection is almost always to be preferred to deletion if a valid target exists. -- MelanieN ( talk) 01:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman ( talk) 23:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete: Subject is not notable under more than one section. This is not even an acceptable stub article let alone a BLP stub. There is just not enough coverage. Placing in the top 15 in Miss Universe 1968 is not notable. One reference even states "But the ultimate success happens in the next six years later, when the name of "Apasra Hongsaku" was announced on stage at the Miss Universe held in Miami, Florida, USA", and she placed 15th? Otr500 ( talk) 08:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep Typically we keep articles that win their nationally-recognized pageant. Winning Miss Thailand in 1967 strongly suggests there are plenty of off-line sources to verify existence and notability to pass WP:GNG. I'm willing to assume good faith and keep it.-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 17:33, 23 September 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep and advise you read the article first before you decide the article should be deleted because you never heard of the subject. -- BCD 05:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • BuickCenturyDriver has been blocked since March 2013 ( log), and his vote should be disregarded. Rebb ing 21:07, 29 September 2016 (UTC) reply
    • WOW! I guess I just naturally assume too much good faith to consider that I have to look at every editor to see if there is a !vote stacking vandal. New area for me--- how does one comment, or use WIkipedia at all, using what looks like an account, that redirects to a car article? Otr500 ( talk) 08:01, 30 September 2016 (UTC) reply
      • Ha! Well, you'd be surprised. I often double-check diffs for edits to talk pages, especially to make sure signatures and alterations correspond to the correct editors. The popups tool helps a bit. This isn't the first time I've spotted something like this; stealth editing of others' comments happens occasionally too.

        The vote was actually made by an IP, not a logged-in editor. Have a look at the diff. The signature was manually typed out. "On the Internet, nobody knows you're an article about a car." From what I gather, BCD was blocked years ago for seriously problematic behavior. He claims he wants back into the fold, but evading his block to cast poorly-researched votes at AFD is not the way to alleviate community concerns. I don't know why he added {{ bots|deny}}. Rebb ing 09:34, 30 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• Comments" Alright, I looked at both references again (translated) after reading " no longer an unsourced BLP" and removed both. There was not even any extremely passing mentions of the subject. Listing a reference, just to show an article has one, is not cool. !Voting keep with "suggest in-depth coverage exists" is not backed by any policy, guideline, or even essay concerning a BLP. !voting keep with "Typically we keep articles that win their nationally-recognized pageant.", means we should take a far better look at beauty pageant BLP subjects that are not referenced or referenced with primary sources only, as there is no inheritability concerning notability on Wikipedia. A primary source can not be used to advance notability. !voting keep with "suggest in-depth coverage exists" might be alright on some article that is not a BLP. Because a source may be "out there somewhere" does not mean we can have an article on a subject. User Montanabw gave the only rationale that might be an actual consideration "Adequate indicia of notability" but again, this is a BLP and the many WP:policies and guidelines like WP:EVENT, and Wikipedia:NOTNEWS provides that if an event is notable then cover it but adding hundreds of non-sourced BLP's just because, does not help Wikipedia. I have no idea what the keep comments from user BCD means.

• A closing admin will know we don't just use a "vote" count on Wikipedia and a !vote for "redirect" still means the editor feels (or better shows with rationale) that a subject does not warrant a separate article on Wikipedia. I have !voted AFD keeps based on some less than ideal coverage but this subject fails notability.

On the WP:BIO notability guideline "This page in a nutshell" states "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. All biographies of living individuals must comply with the policy on biographies of living individuals, being supported by sufficient reliable independent sources to ensure neutrality. Notability criteria may need to be met for a person to be included in a standalone list article.". WP:BLP states "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources.", and this includes Tabloid journalism which is how many of these micro-stub articles are sourced. These things (just a couple) are what we are mandated (by a broad community consensus) to comply with for a subject to have an article on Wikipedia. I am a proponent of articles on local things, and also BLP's, that are more local (as apposed to national or international) but a non-referenced (under referenced or primary sourced referenced) one paragraph entry on a living person is against all Wikipedia stands for.

Also, I looked at the Google search ( first example by user Lerdsuwa) and there is still no specific mention of the subject. The second youtube Miss Donaldson's College. Prayuth Seni Miss Thailand is not specfically about the subject. The 3rd: The 20-year-old magazine Phadungsin No. 10 Friday, February 2512 cover of Pat's Prayuth Seni is about Pat's Prayuth Seni and I didn't look at the 4th. Otr500 ( talk) 10:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC) reply

• I think you may be placing a little too much faith in Google Translate. Please use your common sense. Just because Google is unable to translate her name doesn't mean that all those links are about someone else. Why else would อภันตรี ประยุทธเสนีย์ be in the title? Also, both references that were removed from the article were actually directly supporting the citing statements: that she entered the round of 15 at Miss Universe 1968, and that she played the leading role in Saeng Sun on Channel 7. That they're passing mentions do not detract from the fact that they are verifiable references. I've reverted the removals. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 19:15, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Comments to Paul 012 : I could get translations on every other name but the subject in both references. You admit there is no notability, per the references supplied but was totally vague with "Just because Google is unable to translate her name doesn't mean that all those links are about someone else. Why else would อภันตรี ประยุทธเสนีย์ be in the title?", you then added, "Also, both references that were removed from the article were actually directly supporting the citing statements:". I ran 3 different translators, and I did not come up with the words Apantree Prayuttasenee in any of them. I also ran อภันตรี ประยุทธเสนีย์ thru 3 different translators and I will be surprised if your ""vagueness" of a question turns into ---- that her name is in there. Can you please show me the exact passages in the references that actually use the name as identified by the title of this article? I actually do not place much faith in Google translations, as far as sentences, but it seems three of them can be used to identify proper nouns. Otr500 ( talk) 03:19, 4 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Google Translate is complete rubbish when translating Thai, especially proper nouns which don't appear in the dictionary. Heck, inputting just her name into Google Translate gives " Studies at the University Prayuth Seni." which is obviously gibberish. Why don't you just copy her name in Thai script and search for it in the original language to see if it's on those pages? Anyway, to answer your question:

• The Thairath ref covers her in this paragraph:

  ต่อมาในปีพุทธศักราช 2511 ความงามแบบฉบับของสาวไทยของ "อภันตรี ประยุทธ์เสนีย์" ดีกรีนักเรียนนอกจากปีนัง ยังเข้าตากรรมการ สามารถทะลุเข้าไปในรอบ 15 คนสุดท้ายของเวทีมิสยูนิเวิร์สในปีนั้นได้สำเร็จ ซึ่งแม้จะไม่สามารถคว้าชัยกลับบ้านได้ แต่ก็ช่วยสร้างภาพลักษณ์ใหม่ให้กับสาวไทย ที่มีความทันสมัยและสามารถสื่อสารภาษาอังกฤษได้อย่างคล่องแคล่ว

  Properly translated, it should read something like

  Later, in 1968, the Thai-style beauty of "Apantree Prayutsenee"—with a foreign degree from Penang—also charmed the judges and took her to the round of 15 in that year's Miss Universe pageant. Though she didn't win the contest, she nevertheless helped build a new image for Thai ladies, that of a modern woman fluently conversant in English."

  You wouldn't know though if you relied on Google's translation, which reads:

  Later in the year AD 2511 beauty typical of Thailand's Girl "by Pat Prayut Seni bachelor's" degree students in Penang. The eyes of Can penetrate into the 15 finalists of Miss Universe that year successfully. Although unable to win back home. It helped create a new image for the girl Thailand. With a modern and able to speak English fluently.

• The Khaosod ref mentions her in this paragraph:

  นิรุตติ์ เข้าสู่วงการบันเทิงด้วยการชักชวนของ เทิ่ง สติเฟื่อง สู่วงการแสดงละครทีวี ละครเรื่องแรกคือ แสงสูรย์ รับบทพระรอง โดยมีภิญโญ ทองเจือ เป็นพระเอก คู่กับ อภันตรี ประยุทธเสนี อดีตนางสาวไทย ออกฉายทางทีวีช่อง 7 ยุคขาว-ดำ

  It says:

  Nirut entered the entertainment industry by the invitation of Thoeng Sati-fueang and had his first TV drama role in Saeng Sun, playing the main supporting character. The series starred Pinyo Thongchua and Apantree Prayutsenee, former Miss Thailand, and was broadcast on Channel 7 in the black-and-white days.

  The corresponding passage in the Google Translated version is this:

  Nirut into the entertainment industry with the solicitation of gawky mad career in TV drama. The play was first starring role, with organizations increasingly Thongjua heroic duo with Pat's Bachelor Prayuth SingSinghaseni former Miss Thailand. The seven-run TV channels - white and black.

• The YouTube video that you claimed isn't specifically about her, is in fact specifically about her. Instead of "This past March 21, 2511 Miss Donaldson's College. Prayuth Seni Miss Thailand 2510 to participate in the Miss Universe pageant.", the title should be properly translated as "Today in history: 21 March 1968, Miss Apantree Prayutsenee, Miss Thailand 1967, participates in the Miss Universe Pageant".
• You didn't recognise her staring back from the cover of that magazine, but it shouldn't have been too hard to realise that "Pat's Prayuth Seni" is the result of Google Translate's butchering of her name. And the same goes for all the others.

• Sorry about those "vague" comments, I was just rather baffled at how you could believe that searching for her exact name in the original Thai script, อภันตรี ประยุทธเสนีย์, could return results that don't actually mention her exact name in the original Thai script. Even "Prayuth Seni" should have been close enough to make one realise it's part of her name, mistranslated. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 10:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Comment a google books search suggests that the winner of Miss Thailand in 1967 was named Prapatsorn Panijkul. I'm not sure what is the disconnect (see Thailand Year, Publicity Services (Thailand), 1969. p95-95, accessed September 29, 2016 at https://books.google.com/books?id=EFEIAQAAIAAJ&q=%22Miss+Thailand+1967%22). Smmurphy^{( Talk)} 20:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Prapussorn Panichkul held the title for 1966. Not sure about the dates either. Perhaps they later retroactively changed how they counted the pageant years? -- Paul_012 ( talk) 20:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to Miss Thailand per analysis of sources (passing mentions) and given that the article may be factually incorrect, as noted immediately above (Prapatsorn Panijkul being the 1967 winner). K.e.coffman ( talk) 20:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply
  • The article's factual accuracy is supported by a reliable source, although as Smmurphy noted above, there do appear to be contradictions. That book appears to be the deviant one, however. All others agree with the article, including the pageant's official website. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 20:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• I've stricken the comment about factual correctness. This still does not overcome the issue of coverage being of passing mentions. I've updated my vote to a redirect. K.e.coffman ( talk) 20:55, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

• Comment: The preferred spelling of her name appears to be Apantree Prayutsenee, and the article should be renamed as such if kept. Searching with this spelling gives contemporaneous English-language sources such as this Ebony magazine and this Kansas City Times article. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 10:40, 4 October 2016 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to Miss Thailand (Preserve article history) - There are some sources available for verifiability such as this short article in Kansas City Times. But overall, I don't see enough RS at the moment to be able to write an article per WP:WHYN nor enough significant coverage to pass GNG. Should someone be able to later locate RS I will not object to recreation. -- Lemongirl942 ( talk) 03:09, 6 October 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.