Talk:Miss America

Miss . . .

Perhaps something should be said about the relationship or nonrelationship to other titles/competitions: Miss USA, Miss World, Miss Universe. I always thought Miss America was part of the Miss Universe world, but apparently not. 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:9C6B:5193:60E8:85E1 (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

The Miss America 2025 article

I recently made an article for the Miss America 2025 and related pageant for Wikipedia, but it was stated before this article can be included onto the English Wikipedia it needs to be made neutral, more references will be needed and more information is required along with the facts before this Miss America article is included onto EnWiki with detail involving the contestants and the crowning of the 2025 Miss America. Angela Kate Maureen Pears 14:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Miss America 1924 a Philadelphia citizen?

Omschrijving: Miss-verkiezingen. De winnares van de Miss America verkiezing 1924 laat zich toejuichen, staande in een versierde auto in haar woonplaats. Philadelphia, USA, 1924

Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Indeed: Ruth Malcomson. -- Vysotsky (talk) 20:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

New Logo?

The logo currently being featured hasn't been in use since I think 2016. Should it be updated to the current one? Kendphi (talk) 15:39, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Poor sourcing for 1970s and more

Many of the Miss America articles are in bad shape. For example, all the 1970s editions: Of the total set, they have either no contestants table (probably because I already removed it), or an unreferenced table of 50 contestants, performances, etc. (1971, 1973, 1975, and 1977) or, like 2001, a single reference in the entire table indicating the name of the winner (1970). None of them have more than 2 sources, and several have just one (1973, 1978, 1979). I don't see why these should be retained in this state. Additionally, maybe it's not diagnostic, but I noticed that all of the articles listed as having just one source, plus five more – in other words, 80% of the 1970s Miss Americas – were created by the John254 sockarm or another blocked account, blocked in part for creating errors and not discussing them. This does not speak well to the idea of leaving the contents as they stand.

Pageant year articles with one or two sources should be strongly considered for redirection to this article as alternative to deletion. I'm open to discussion as to what one or two sources would need to contain for the year article to be retained; it should consider WP:NEVENT three-part test of depth of coverage, duration of coverage, and diversity of sources. I'm not seeing that a single source that, for example, mentions the top 5 placements, could possibly qualify. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

So, here I am from your talk page, then from Talk:Miss America 2003. Could you answer the question posed there? Do you believe it is appropriate to redirect an entire article, which has key parts of which cited to one or two excellent reliable sources, because less important sections of it are not so cited? --GRuban (talk) 23:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

I was hoping you'd respond to the reference to the three-part test in WP:NEVENT: depth of coverage, duration of coverage, and diversity of sources. I'm assuming by "excellent" reliable sources, you mean "top quality", as in Associated Press or a reputable national newspaper. I think I would generally support a redirect with one or two of these types of sources, because they are likely to fail to demonstrate at least duration of coverage (these are usually directly after results are televised), and diversity of sources (one or two isn't sufficiently diverse). Depth of coverage is iffy -- I saw one you posted that was about 10 column inches in a scanned archive, which isn't trivial – but it isn't much to base a whole Wikipedia article on either. Here's hoping some other people chime in and give some more perspectives. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:NEVENT says "2. Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources." All of these were; virtually every newspaper in the country ran the Miss America results, prominently, most did so on their front page. Fewer, but still many, newspapers covered the contests before and after; usually the Atlantic City papers and the ones from the states of the leading candidates, but these were still major newspapers, and diverse. All the sources are there, and numerous, and even accessible, we each have a Newspapers.com subscription through The Wikipedia Library, you can find them as easily as I can, you just don't want to. The effort to look for news coverage takes an hour, while redirecting is a minute, destruction is easier than creation. Here, when you previously redirected 30 Miss America articles, it took you two days. Citing each one and restoring it took me a year, and now you're targeting them again.

More importantly, on your same page, in the section The great Miss USA article massacre you wrote:

If someone wants to restore these with one reference, it's all there in the page history to work with. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:26, 19 July 2023 (UTC) I did that, and I'm holding you to that. Keep your word. Don't move the goal posts. --GRuban (talk) 00:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)