Talk:Caitlin Upton

message: I just spent a good deal of time and effort finding sources and putting together a page for her. Why the speedy deletion? If we can have wiki pages on obscure Star Wars creatures why can't we have one about a person that had over 2 MILLION views on the internet in one day? This story has been all over the news? WTF?! ChesterCharge 13:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple. She has no notability outside of the event. It doesn't matter how people responded, but the link is included. "Millions of views" says how well-known the event was. There is no page needed for either Ms. Upton or the event. Zchris87v 06:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This would be a useful page.  I came here to find out the background about this person but someone is trying to browbeat it off of Wiki.  Say, Zchris87v, what state are you from again?  Is this woman a friend of yours? Migaila 06:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This page is like the Matrix, its been deleted and rebuilt several times over. I had quite a hard time getting it up the first (or n^{th} - who knows) time, then they deleted everything all at once so there was no way to respond.  Now that I've started reading encyclopedia dramatica a lot more, there is a a place for trivia and stupid internet people. The Admins should work to channel enthusiastic editors to other sites that serve the same purpose but for less erudite subject matter. There is a good case to be made to branch off all the sports and televison/movie celebrities to another site, where they can grow, instead of being compared with the word count of some battle in the civil war.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pasienski (talk • contribs) 01:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

text: You are using the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, which is invalid. Besides, the "Star Wars Kid" generated a lawsuit, Paris Hilton has numerous television appearances, and Mel Gibson is a famed actor. This article's subject said one sentence that didn't make sense. That's hardly a reason for an article. Zchris87v 05:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Come off it with that "Other stuff exists" BS... OTHER STUFF REALLY DOES EXIST. Sometimes people need to show examples to further explain their discussion. Would a biology teacher explain a certain part of a cell only to leave other parts out, simply because they exist?? So what, they exist. Now open your ears and listen to his reasoning! 24.251.84.221 08:39, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're kidding, right?    .  Come back to me when you can explain how an article in People magazine was supposedly written by her friends. PageantUpdater  talk • contribs  08:46, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy deletion?

message: This block is outrageous and un-Wiki! Lauren Caitlin is about a TRILLION times more important, beloved and prominent than at least 99% of all the article subjects on this joke of a site.
WHY, OH WHY, are Wikipedia's administrators so freaking a***-retentive and have such an inferiority complex and fragile egos???
Do all of you HAVE TO ruin the fun and enthusiasm of the rest of us members JUST BECAUSE you need to feel powerful and important so desperately?? Are all of you school marm librarian types in wool sweaters with thick glasses, afraid of the thought of romance and fun?
SHEESH.
This Lauren Caitlin Upton Bio page better be approved quickly and available for work. America can't wait any longer for the Wikipedia Administrator Moron Club and assorted other freak Wikipedia unions to get a life.
Don't you people have JOBS, or do you just play with yourselves here while you're playing with and tormenting the rest of us contributors?
Nleobold 00:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outrageous!!!!! 

message: Messy Thinking 18:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A good story 

message: There is now a Deletion Review Here regarding the deletion and protection of the article.--Joebengo 05:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion Review 

message: How can we discuss an article for deletion when there is absolutely no article?  This needs to be unprotected immediately.  --Oakshade 02:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Blanked article in AfD?

message: Caitlin Upton is an American fashion model and beauty pageant contestant who is currently Miss South Carolina Teen USA.  She was the 3rd runner up in the 2007 Miss Teen USA pageant.  Upton gained international notoriety for her indecipherable response to a question posed to her during the national pageant.   
Upton is from Lexington, South Carolina and had attended Lexington High School where she was an honor student.   She has modeled in numerous advertisements for such companies as Nautica and Wrangler and has appeared in national magazines like Seventeen, Cosmo Girl and American Cheerleader. 
Upton plans to attend Appalachian State University to study graphic design.
Famous response
As part of a question and answer portion of the 2007 Miss Teen USA pageant, Upton was asked by a pageant judge, "Recent polls have shown a fifth of Americans can't locate the U.S. on a world map. Why do you think this is?"
A nervous Upton responded:
I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, um, some people out there in our nation don't have maps and, uh, I believe that our, uh, education like such as, uh, South Africa and, uh, the Iraq and everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, uh, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., uh, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future for our [children].
.   
According to YouTube, video clips of her response on the website have had over 10 million views*  .  Many YouTube users made their own paradies of the incident.   As a guest on NBC's The Today Show, Caitlin told Ann Curry and Matt Lauer that she was "overwhelmed" when asked the question and didn't comprehend it correctly  .  The Today Show hosts gave Upton another opportunity to answer the question and she responded:
Personally, my friends and I, we know exactly where the United States is on a map. I don’t know anyone else who doesn’t. If the statistics are correct, I believe there should be more emphasis on geography in our education so people will learn how to read maps better. 
Both Curry and Lauer, along with unseen Today Show crew members, applauded her response. 
===Notes===
::Take out the word "interesting" for that might have a derogatory connotation. Aside from that, the draft is more than suitable. The only statement that I'd like to add is: "Because of the extensive coverage of the incident on youtube, Upton's response has become something of an internet phenomenon". Zuracech lordum 07:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to edit this.  I'm trying to think of a more suitable word than "interesting", but if you have an idea, have at it.  --Oakshade 19:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The obvious starting place for any article would be the article that was here until June/July until I speedied it after the other AFDs. This followed the general layout for pageant titleholder bios and included an infobox etc.  Hopefully an admin could restore it.  Obviously information about her performance at Teen USA and her famous answer could then be added to that... what I'm basically saying is there is no need to start from scratch.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by PageantUpdater (talk • contribs) 10:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just saw that version for the first time.  Very well wikified article.  Probably would be good to use combined aspects from both.--Oakshade 19:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  "incorrect response", "unusual response", "tongue-tied response". "nonsensical response", "retarded response", "abstract response", "esoteric response", "rambling response", "asinine response", "meaningless response", "ditzy response", "empty-headed response", "astonishing response", "absurd response", "incomprehensible response"... I have more if none of those are suitable.--WebHamster 19:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like "unusual response".  Not derogatory and could mean anything. --Oakshade 19:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Isn't "nonsensical response" really the most accurate description for that? I see no offense in stating the obvious.Willie the Walrein-talk to me 01:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Although nonsensical does a good job of describing it, "indecipherable" would be best because it was used by a reliable source. PageantUpdater  talk • contribs  06:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like "indecipherable".  Should the article be kept, it would be good to start the one your put together (I, as likely do others, have a few tweek ideas) and add the response to it. --Oakshade 06:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Draft article

message: ::Take out the word "interesting" for that might have a derogatory connotation. Aside from that, the draft is more than suitable. The only statement that I'd like to add is: "Because of the extensive coverage of the incident on youtube, Upton's response has become something of an internet phenomenon". Zuracech lordum 07:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to edit this.  I'm trying to think of a more suitable word than "interesting", but if you have an idea, have at it.  --Oakshade 19:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The obvious starting place for any article would be the article that was here until June/July until I speedied it after the other AFDs. This followed the general layout for pageant titleholder bios and included an infobox etc.  Hopefully an admin could restore it.  Obviously information about her performance at Teen USA and her famous answer could then be added to that... what I'm basically saying is there is no need to start from scratch.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by PageantUpdater (talk • contribs) 10:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just saw that version for the first time.  Very well wikified article.  Probably would be good to use combined aspects from both.--Oakshade 19:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  "incorrect response", "unusual response", "tongue-tied response". "nonsensical response", "retarded response", "abstract response", "esoteric response", "rambling response", "asinine response", "meaningless response", "ditzy response", "empty-headed response", "astonishing response", "absurd response", "incomprehensible response"... I have more if none of those are suitable.--WebHamster 19:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like "unusual response".  Not derogatory and could mean anything. --Oakshade 19:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Isn't "nonsensical response" really the most accurate description for that? I see no offense in stating the obvious.Willie the Walrein-talk to me 01:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Although nonsensical does a good job of describing it, "indecipherable" would be best because it was used by a reliable source. PageantUpdater  talk • contribs  06:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like "indecipherable".  Should the article be kept, it would be good to start the one your put together (I, as likely do others, have a few tweek ideas) and add the response to it. --Oakshade 06:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: This story is not Wiki material unless it is posted as of other people where it shows their bio and other significant stats and accomplishments.  As an educator, I can attest that our education system is flawed, however, this incident can be somewhat of a footnote. It should not be posted in and of itself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockfan (talk • contribs) 19:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post should be part of a larger article 

message: As I have stated earlier, many people here are using the argument (who may not know it exists) WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Essentially, because something is lesser known does not mean something that is more well known should exist just because the lesser known thing exists. We've all heard about this video by now, but arguing that someone else isn't as well known and they have an article is, by the standard of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, an invalid argument. Zchris87v 05:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that comments on whether or not this article should exist should be directed to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caitlin Upton rather than being posted here. --After Midnight 0001 12:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This in fact does not negate my argument by any means, and is not a valid reason to claim that my response is "bias and unwanted", because the points that I prove are clear. "Other stuff exists" is STILL not a valid argument, and nowhere in that portion of this discussion did I say I wanted the article deleted or kept. Because I am from South Carolina does not mean that people can still use the Other Stuff Exists argument. My opinion on the article may not count, but I can clearly see the use of an invalid argument. Zchris87v 02:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "But there's an article on so and so...

message: I put in a little blurb that I heard on WIS News Midday (I'm from Lexington, SC) about Upton signing a contract with Donald Trump's Modeling Agency.  She reported to NYC this morning where she will live in the Trump Apartments and take on assignments that will have her flying all around the world and earning potentially $25,000 per day.  If any one could clean what I wrote so that it meets Wiki standards, I would appreciate.  You can check the WIS TV website for references.71.28.98.203 16:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can put in a weblink to the story, that would be helpful.  So far I can't find it on the WIS website except a written line about "a pending modeling contract in New York City."  --Oakshade 17:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a few and inserted one into the article. --Oakshade 21:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trump Modeling Agency

message: This will be forgotten by next week Chwyatt (talk) 13:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Famous response'?

message: Listening to the Today clip, she did not say "on a map", but:
:Personally, my friends and I, we know exactly where the United States is on our map.
jnothman talk 12:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  On a map? 

message: Read this:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/news/archives/2007/08/27/now_where_is_america_anyway.html
Now I wonder: who really is the stupid one? The Legend of Miyamoto (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Opinion 

message: I'm pretty sure she said the word "osama" ... towards the beginning of her confused speech... can other people here verify if that's the case? 137.92.97.114 (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Verification, by this encyclopedia's standards, comes from reliable sources.  Those referenced in the article, USA Today and The Guardian, don't interpret that section of the speech as "osama."  As far as I can tell, no other reliable source has interpreted it that way as well.  --Oakshade (talk) 21:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

text: It's not "Osama".. It's "Some" .. as of "Because um some people...". --Suki300me (talk) 15:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Osama 

message: Shouldnt there be a new headline for her appearance on Amazing Race 16? like with Jordan Llyod's page?--Kevmicester2000 (talk) 21:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to be bold and create one.  Sourcing is always helpful.  I'm a bit busy at the moment.--Oakshade (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amazing Race 

message: I know nothing about the individual of whom this article is about, but I can't help but notice numerous personal attacks like, "convoluted and nonsensical", of which Wikipedia is no place for. All personal opinions, personal values and biases should be refrained from here. If an expert on the subject or someone else who is noteworthy makes such a statement, that is fine, individual should be credited and it needs to be cited. Nowhere should it draw attention to the author of the page. For example, if you will notice that in the entry for the Joseph Stalin, the author doesn't call him a monster.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE9D:EFD0:D469:B492:5380:5CC3 (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a personal opinion piece, rather than a Wiki entry 

message: Where is the link  to the esurance ad or an article saying it exists?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.4.65 (talk) 15:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No citations in the parody section? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Caitlin Upton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070831084800/http://www.iht.com:80/articles/ap/2007/08/28/america/NA-GEN-US-Beauty-Queen-Geography.php to http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/28/america/NA-GEN-US-Beauty-Queen-Geography.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:41, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Caitlin Upton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071029125549/http://www.news.com.au:80/entertainment/story/0,23663,22450632-10229,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,23663,22450632-10229,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:11, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Comments by Tucker Carlson on Upton are noteworthy and references are reliable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hhfjbaker (talk • contribs) 20:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversial comments by Tucker Carlson

message: Please remove the errant ` mark from  Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: DanCherek (talk) 23:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Also asked the protecting administrator about the possibility of lifting it, after 16 years. DanCherek (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 2 July 2023