Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuPaul's DragCon UK

Add links
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 draftified. If the article is not improved in draft, it will be deleted in due course. It is now at Draft:RuPaul's DragCon UK. BD2412 T 01:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RuPaul's DragCon UK

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

RuPaul's DragCon UK (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Event has not yet happened (WP:CRYSTAL) and all sources provided are affiliated and not independent. Loksmythe (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Loksmythe (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong and snow keep, this is the first international version of the hugely successful RuPaul’s DragCon series, each of witch annually attracts 100,000 attendees and are the world’s largest drag queen events.

    This event is also produced by the same company and will be hosted by its namesake RuPaul, the world’s most famous drag queen.

    Already confirmed are at least two dozen of the world’s most famous drag queens.

    Even if the event was cancelled the episode would generate rounds of media coverage. And we would want to preserve the content somewhere.

    And I think the nominator may have failed WP:Before by 1.) not looking for any alternative; and 2.) not looking hard enough for reliable sourcing. Gleeanon409 (talk) 11:51, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify until closer to the event per WP:CRYSTAL. There's already some good early RS (see [1] for example), but it's a bit premature to meet WP:SIGCOV. The event will get lots of coverage come January, and the article can be moved to main space then once it has been referenced properly. @Gleeanon409: Invoking snow is not appropriate in this case because of wikipedia's policy regarding future events. I could find only one independent article in a pretty thorough search (the rest were sources affiliated with World of Wonder or were press releases by World of Wonder). I would imagine some more RS will unfold by the end of December/ early January. You should prune the article of primary sources in draft space and work with independent references as they emerge. Once you have three or four substantial references that are independent of the subject we could move it into main space. I have no doubt that you will be successful given some time which is why I am recommending draftifying the article so you don't lose your hard work.4meter4 (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • By my count there’s already five. And WP:Crystal says, “All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred.” Both of those are easily met. Gleeanon409 (talk) 22:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gleeanon409: Please provide the 5 articles here, so I can give you a thoughtful response. It's hard to isolate which references you are referring to as their are so many inappropriate primary sources in the article. I did not see anything of worth towards RS per WP:Verifiability.4meter4 (talk) 17:07, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • I removed two sources, that someone else had added, as WP:Primary, I believe the rest are reliable.
        • "RuPaul's DragCon UK Was Just Announced! | What A Drag Blog". What A Drag. 2019-09-08. Retrieved 2019-09-08.
        • ^ a b c d e f g h i j Yates, Jonathan (October 18, 2019). "Vanessa Vanjie Mateo, Shea Coulee and more join RuPaul's DragCon lineup". My London. Retrieved November 16, 2019.
        • ^ a b Yates, Jonathan (October 1, 2019). "Bob The Drag Queen, Miz Cracker and more join RuPaul's DragCon lineup". My London. Retrieved November 16, 2019.
        • ^ Doonan, Simon (September 30, 2019). "Meet the men behind RuPaul's Drag Race: 'We're bringing bawdiness back to the UK' | Herald Publicist". Herald Publicist. Retrieved November 16, 2019.
        • ^ Damshenas, Sam (September 9, 2019). "RuPaul's DragCon is officially coming to the UK - here's how to get tickets". Gay Times. Retrieved November 16, 2019.
        • ^ Yates, Jonathan (September 24, 2019). "RuPaul's DragCon UK at London's Olympia - tickets, lineup and more". My London/Get West London. Retrieved November 16, 2019.
        • Of course there might be others as I use a news filter, so just started with what was available. Gleeanon409 (talk) 23:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify or Delete, per 4meter4's arguments above. A lot of the information on the page and the sourcing is only tangentially related and seems more of an essay issue than about the subject. See WP:NOTESSAY. In fact, of the info I removed (and which Gleeanon409 seems to be adding back), the sources don't even mention DragCon UK, much less cover it in depth. I would strongly encourage Gleeanon409 to leave the cruft out rather than adding it back, as the article looks more like an essay than coverage of the actual subject. --Kbabej (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I accept that someone who has not read potentially *every* reliable subject on RuPaul’s DragCons would feel that way, it’s a niche subject granted. But in actually reading those sources including interviews it’s obvious that the aspects you deleted—-about DragCons being a special space outside bars/clubs: where fans can intentionally meet and talk with the drag queens they admire, if even for only ten minutes; where LGBTQ children have a safe space to be themselves—-are universal to RuPaul’s DragCons, of which this is one. There is exactly zero reasons to believe this DragCon will Be fundamentally different than the other two. And you non-helpful suggestion that that info simply be sent to the parent article would be welcome if such an article existed, it does not. I wrote the other two DragCon articles, this is why I’m familiar with the content, and sourcing. Gleeanon409 (talk) 22:50, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But here's the thing: This article isn't the catch-all about how "DragCons being a special space outside bars/clubs: where fans can intentionally meet and talk with the drag queens they admire, if even for only ten minutes; where LGBTQ children have a safe space to be themselves." This article is about DragRace UK. You have no idea if DRUK is going to be that kind of space, because A. It hasn't happened yet, and B. No RS has stated that. Did you even review WP:NOTESSAY? It seems WP:NOTOPINION might be relevant as well. --Kbabej (talk) 22:56, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, interesting to note, I stated "Again, this is not about DragCon UK. This could potentially be used on the RuPaul's DragCon NYC however" on an edit of removing tangentially related info. You stated, "And you non-helpful suggestion that that info simply be sent to the parent article would be welcome if such an article existed, it does not." In fact, it does, considering you lifted the exact section from DracCon NYC, as seen here. --Kbabej (talk) 23:05, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I attributed the content to that article, which you are now attacking. Gleeanon409 (talk) 23:19, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry you feel I am attacking the NYC article. The issues you have with my edits can be brought up at the article's talk page here. The issue is the same, however: You're writing an essay, which would be great for a magazine piece. Unfortunately, RS don't support what you're positing; NYC (and, on this thread, UK) weren't even mentioned. --Kbabej (talk) 23:23, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The content is solely about the interaction of drag queens with children which happens in rare circumstances except...at DragCons. I hope you can see the connection. Gleeanon409 (talk) 23:42, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But it's a tenuous connection that you're making, not that RS are reporting on. One could just as easily use sources to write an essay claiming drag queen culture is harmful to children (and there are those sources out there; see here and here for example). Does that make sense? --Kbabej (talk) 23:47, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tenuous? Have you seen Nina West’s Drag is Magic, Drag Kids, and Desmond is Amazing? There are more but Drag Race In 2009 started mainstreaming drag queens and an audience for the show turned out to be LGBTQ kids who identified with the queens. A significant percentage of DragCon attendees are minors, I believe under 13’s have to be accompanied by an adult. The reliable sources, that you deleted, do make that connection, and I have yet to see any reliable ones even suggest that the culture of drag queens harms children. Although right-wing sites that generally attack LGBTQ people sure would like you to believe so. I checked out those sources you suggest, neither is WP:Reliable. Gleeanon409 (talk) 00:08, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't seem as if you're receptive to others' thoughts regarding this (and related) articles. The fact of the matter is, none of the sources you used in those sections even mention the topic, much less cover it in depth. It seems you're wanting to write an essay on children involved in the drag community; this article is not the place for it. A simple way to look at a source: does it cover the subject? No? Then it probably doesn't belong on the page. I hope that's helpful. --Kbabej (talk) 00:21, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The issue we seem to greatly differ on is if DragCon is noted in reliable sources as an event where drag queens and children celebrate drag culture together. I feel you’re working to remove perfectly apt content that would certainly belong in a good article about DragCon, others may disagree. Gleeanon409 (talk) 01:08, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gleeanon409, I think you are completely missing/ not comprehending what other people are telling you. If you have an article about family/children content at Drag Con UK then that content would be welcome on the page of this article. However, those source are not about Drag Con UK, so that content does not belong in this particular article. You could have that content on the other Drag Con pages (such as RuPaul's DragCon NYC) which those article are referring to. You've got to stick to what is in the sources being cited and not make assumptions beyond the sources.4meter4 (talk) 17:43, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And what you are completely missing is that the DragCons are the largest events of their kind by far, ten times the size as the next closest. And the exact same company is putting on this one as well with zero evidence that it will vary except by location. This is a corporation expanding with a new outlet, also in an English-speaking country with what by every appearance is the same formula.
The removed content referred to DragCons not specific to one city. And frankly, that both the NYC and LA DragCon articles exist should be evidence that a UK one is indeed appropriate and satisfies the WP:Crystal concerns. Gleeanon409 (talk) 23:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. I've actually been to Drag Con in LA and NYC so I think I can safely say they aren't exactly the same from first hand experience, and I started watching the show when it first started on LOGO. LA has a much bigger family/kid oriented portion to it than the NYC Con for example. I'm a big fan. Regardless, I don't have to present evidence that something will be different because we don't have to prove things in the negative here at AFD. As I stated above, you have to base your article on the sources and what they say, and prove that there is enough RS to make a quality article. I am just not seeing enough RS yet for this event to meet WP:SIGCOV. We have to follow policy at WP:CRYSTAL. I know that eventually there will be enough sources for this event, which is why I am supporting draftify over delete. Be patient. Once some more reporting is done on the event you can move it into main space.4meter4 (talk) 00:15, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That level of detail isn’t discussed in any of the articles as the sources haven’t given it. But it’s fairly ridiculous to pretend that they will have have their signature Kids Zone and yet content about drag queens and kids isn’t appropriate. The article as is, even chopped down, is still fully reliably sourced, all verifiable, and perfectly appropriate as a stub. Gleeanon409 (talk) 00:38, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gleeanon409: I think you are having a difficult time taking a step back and keeping a neutral point of view. Firstly. Drag Con LA looks a bit different than Drag Con NYC, and surely Drag Con UK will have its own different flavor as well. You can't assume that something that is true for one Drag Con will be true about another Drag Con. Each country's or city's laws and culture are different, and Drag Con will reflect that. For that reason, you can't use articles from or about another Drag Con to cite claims in an article about this Drag Con, because that is a big assumption going beyond what those sources are actually saying. Even if you think these things are likely true in the real world, wikipedia is not interested in what is true but what is "verifiably true". You are making a lot of assumptions that are just not provable based on the sources. Further, you can't use self published sources by VH1 or World of Wonder or its affiliates because they are primary sources or sources too closely connected to the subject. This might be frustrating, but it's a reality.4meter4 (talk) 17:24, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn’t add those two sources and have removed them as WP:Primary. Gleeanon409 (talk) 23:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gleeanon409:Thank you. Also, WP:BLOGS says that we can't use blogs as sources, so "RuPaul's DragCon UK Was Just Announced!". can't be used either. Further, none of the content in How Drag Went Mainstream is about DragCon in the UK or the United States. DragWorld is a completely different convention not associated with World of Wonder or Drag Race, although many Drag Race alum participate. You should remove all of that content, because it is totally not congruent with what is in the article. Additionally, WP:PRSOURCE says we can not use press releases as sources, which means you cannot use RuPaul's DragCon UK: Vanessa Vanjie Mateo, Shea Coulee and more join lineup or RuPaul's DragCon UK at London's Olympia - how to get tickets, lineup and more or New York City welcomes RuPaul’s DragCon NYC or Yaaas! RuPaul’s DragCon is officially coming to the UK – here’s how to get tickets or Everything You Need to Know About RuPaul’s Drag Race UK. All of that is press release promoting the show, and none of it is independent coverage. 4meter4 (talk) 05:01, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Update, I removed the one reference that did not support the content it was claiming to support. I removed that content about the other convention as well. None of the sources in the article meet the standard of RS as explained above. 4meter4 (talk) 05:31, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Outdent) Wp:blogs says that they can be unreliable at times. Similarly wp:PRSOURCE says an actual press release should not be directly cited, which we have not done, and only factual statements can be used, exactly what we’ve done. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:28, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. Please read the whole policy, and not cherrypick the parts that appeal to you. Your blogs are not written by acknowledged experts in the field as defined at WP:BLOGS: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications." Further, wp:PRSOURCE says nothing about directly citing but says attribution must be placed in the text of the article when using such a source: "Non-independent sources may be used to source content for articles, but the connection of the source to the topic must be clearly identified. i.e. "The organization X said 10,000 people showed up to protest." is OK when using material published by the organization, but "10,000 people showed up to protest." is not." In other words, its ok to quote and use if you are clearly stating where the content is coming from in the written text and not just at the citation at the end of the sentence. Further, WP:PRSOURCE is very clear that these sources should be used sparingly and with caution because they lack independence. "Non-independent sources may not be used to establish notability." Your continuing reliance on these sources shows poor editorial judgement. There are no sources here considered quality enough RS to meet WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 19:25, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I’m convinced that I am within the spirit of reliable sourcing even if one chooses to try to tear apart one source after the next.
Not every source directly cites RuPaul’s DragCon UK, but those are generally still used approximately to source other facts that help our readers understand the subject. For example discussing, very briefly, DragWorld, which is as of now Europe’s largest drag convention. That would seem to be perfectly relevant to this article.
Blogs may be used but in no way editorially, or even spreading falsehoods. The are specialists in LGBTQ and drag content but are used minimally and no one suggests what they report is false.
as for sources relying on Drag Race’s own press? Well you may have to get used to it as even mainstream news sources do that very thing. For anything actually contested there is likely 2 or 3 more sources stating the exact same thing. And no one disputes the rather humdrum facts stated are true.
So it’s fairly obvious this article shouldn’t be deleted, but given this level of interrogation I do wonder; this DragCon, undoubtedly Europe’s largest by far, only 60 days away, how many more reliable sources does it need to finally make it over these moving goal posts?
How close to this event is close enough for an article about it? The day of? And what sources are likely to cover it much without prompting from Drag Race? Likely the very sources that already have. Gleeanon409 (talk) 13:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I have changed my vote from draftify to delete. Unfortunately, Gleeanon409 seems resistant from learning from what other editors are saying about what constitutes reliable sources per wikipedia policy. I am not confident that even in draft space that good editorial judgement would be used in terms of basic sourcing. He or she seems unable to discern between viable RS and press releases and blogs. Further, the editor has restored content to the article which is clearly not in the text of any of the sources cited.4meter4 (talk) 12:14, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I even added the direct quote, “So at what point did drag move from niche to mainstream concern? It was TV production company World of Wonder that first put RuPaul’s TV show Drag Race on screens in 2009, leading to the show enveloping popular culture during its 11 seasons (and being partly responsible for why so many people use words such as “fierce”, “werk” and “shade”).“ It supports the statement that RuPaul’s Drag Race popularized drag to the mainstream. Gleeanon409 (talk) 12:28, 18 November 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/RuPaul's_DragCon_UK&oldid=1068992626"