Deletion of Miss Earth 2001

Comment: there are contributors that will include reliable independent sources. Opinions to delete are irrelevant, if we rely on your personal references, Wikipedia is no longer adhering to its policy. Refer to these essays if you are in a rush to delete these articles:   
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:There is no deadline (WP:DEADLINE||WP:NOEFFORT||WP:IDL)

Comment: to delete these articles would be like delete the Football World Cup articles. But no one would do that. Miss Earth is a BIG4 beauty pageant and falls under WP:GNG.  is not enough to justify deletion of a very well known beauty pageant
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: The articles passed  and . Miss Earth is a notable pageant and deserves the annual articles just like the other Big 4 pageants: Miss World, Miss Universe, and Miss International. The key is to work on the articles and add reliable sources not to delete these articles. Take for example the article,  Miss Earth 2003 has numerous acceptable sources such as BBC, The Associated Press, New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, CNN News, Agence France Presse , TIME Magazine, Fox World, and etc. The Miss Earth 2008  article has numerous reliable sources from different news agencies all over the world in different languages for the delegates and this can be done in the other yearly-editions. I agree with the commenter, Chburnett98 that "the articles like Miss Earth 2001 to Miss Earth 2015 discuss the events happened on the said year, the theme of the year and the annual results as well as the name of the contestants of the said year. It is clearly obvious that the these articles are different from the article Miss Earth." I also agree with  Legacypac, that the minor awards winners were not notable to be included in the articles and therefore be deleted, but the major awards in the articles should be retained with acceptable source
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NEVENT)

Comment: The nomination for deletion seems very suspicious as they seem to be identified as personal preferences and just belong in . Reliable sources such as official websites, news, and other sources are clearly present in Miss Earth articles. Miss Earth is an annual event like other beauty pageants such as Miss Universe, Miss World and Miss International. It is important for these events to have an article in Wikipedia for historical purposes. Miss Earth article introduces the pageant, pageant system and the main points of the pageant. However,  articles like Miss Earth 2001 to Miss Earth 2015 discuss the events happened on the said year, the theme of the year and the annual results as well as the name of the contestants of the said year. It is clearly obvious that the these articles are different from the article Miss Earth. If Miss Earth articles have to be deleted, Miss Universe, Miss World and Miss International articles must also be deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: This whole stuff looks like it is one of the dozens of other lobbying awareness beauty pageantries. If it is really the third largest of all, like the main article claims, why the other ones from the big three do not have this same sort of cruft attached to them...? I can not really see these prizes being worth of a semi-biographical article for each and every winner or event. I could not find additional notability from the articles themselves for these women, or for these events. . Tereza Fajksová and Olga Álava for instance have their own articles already, and they deserve them for their own deeds
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENT)