About Pageant Rankings

[Neekolas]

In your own opinion, when is a beauty pageant considered as a 'MAJOR' one?
What are the criteria/standard/bases for classifying a beauty pageant as a big league?
Let us discuss rationally as Missosologists.
..............................................................................................................
Background:
China Daily, South China Morning Post, and a Korean newspaper Chosun IIbo described Miss Universe, Miss World,
Miss International and Miss Earth as the "four of the world's top beauty pageants".
Missosology is probably the most popular pageant website and I think it's opinion regarding the ranking of beauty pageants
is relevant and cannot be ignored. However, other other groups can also create their own rankings and classifications.
If Missosology is the 'Science of Beauty', then it should be the leading authority in beauty pageant classifications.
However, it needs to be transparent with its criteria to further establish itself not only as a beauty pageant website but as an authority
in beauty pageant analyses.

[Elyerno Zabagguri]

i still consider B-I-G 4 OVER B-I-G 5.

Major pageants are Miss Universe, Miss World, Miss International, and Miss Earth only. Because of relevance and recognition.

[Queen Esther]

Missosology is an authority but irrelevant fans are just noisy to push their agenda! They are worthless fans who should open their own webpage. Missosology already has long history so it is a leading brand when it comes to pageant opinion.

But Missosology's biggest mistake is to include Miss Supranational as a major pageant. When they began to recognize it as a major pageant, the winners of that pageant have gone worse and worse each year! Whoever Missosology chooses as a winner only ends up as 1st Runner Up

[Neekolas]

Words need to be defined clearly and objectively.
What is 'relevance'? How is it measured?
When does a beauty pageant become 'relevant'?
......................................................
Missosology should lead the way and prove that it's BIG 5 not just opinion but something more objective and rational.

[esperasave]

Words need to be defined clearly and objectively.
What is 'relevance'? How is it measured?
When does a beauty pageant become 'relevant'?
......................................................
Missosology should lead the way and prove that it's BIG 5 not just opinion but something more objective and rational.

The winner themselves, if they are indeed beautiful. If not, then that organization should be downgraded to as a minor pageant. They should be judged each year as to how they fare.

[Virginia Dalisay]

Longevity, integrity and credibility, thats my 3 factors to consider in ranking beauty pageants.

[mrworld]

The pageant must have great CAUSE and affiliated with many REPUTABLE Organization that backs them up like United Nation, Unicef, Smile Train, etc. that is why only Miss Universe, Miss World, Miss International and Miss Earth (the big Four) are cut above the rest and considered as Major Pageants

[mybadname]

Words need to be defined clearly and objectively.
What is 'relevance'? How is it measured?
When does a beauty pageant become 'relevant'?
......................................................
Missosology should lead the way and prove that it's BIG 5 not just opinion but something more objective and rational.

Relevance is an important word. One can only be relevant if it is understood by a justifiable claims set by the standards of the world and how it was accepted internationally without forcing itself to the majority.

[ajsy0203]

Words need to be defined clearly and objectively.
What is 'relevance'? How is it measured?
When does a beauty pageant become 'relevant'?
......................................................
Missosology should lead the way and prove that it's BIG 5 not just opinion but something more objective and rational.

Relevance is an important word. One can only be relevant if it is understood by a justifiable claims set by the standards of the world and how it was accepted internationally without forcing itself to the majority.

And if the legitimate media acknowledges these pageants as major pageants.

[Totoypasiboy]

What are the criteria? Well, importance, relevance, and impact to the society. All pageants can claim that they are the best, the biggest and the grandest but only a few can be included in the elite group of "PAGEANT THAT TRULY MATTERS." And in my opinion, only Miss Universe, Miss World, Miss International and Miss Earth deserve that distinction. The others are just wannabes... full stop!

Charot!

[quelab22]

R-E-L-E-V-A-N-C-E and not trying hard to be not famewhore

[Stoichio]

The standards to use in ranking pageants is quite nebulous because each individual has his/her own preferences; however, at least the following criteria should be ticked.

1. Recognition by reputable international organizations and global big media outlets.
2. Popularity
3. Relevance of the pageant’s cause to society
4. Number of participating countries - this should not be equated to popularity or relevance coz pageants have varying franchise fees. Some are expensive while others are cheap (even giving free fees to some participating countries).
5. Production/entertainment value during finals
6. Quality of activities for the contestants leading up to the pageant finals

[esperasave]

R-E-L-E-V-A-N-C-E and not trying hard to be not famewhore

Relevance or gimmicky. These so called major pageants nowadays will turn into so many gimmicks to be considered important, impactful or relevant. They even let a transgender joined the pageantry. They announced Miss Philippines erroneously twice. Even Megan Young was called in as Miss Poland. They are voicing political and social advocacies but look at the winners. And where do the winners mostly stay, in their New York pad for alot of time during their reign. Its all for gimmicks. But the Glitz and Glamour of Women were left behind in the black hole. Nowhere to find in the habitable zone. Unlike Sports or Hollywood, they have business to take care but never did they deal this political and social scenario in their games and acting. But to a little extent even barely.

[georgj16]

Tbh, only Miss Universe and Miss World should be considered as major pageants.

[Neekolas]

Great output guys!

I think the following are objective and measurable criteria:

1. Affiliations from humanitarian international organizations
2. Number of participating countries and number of franchises
3. Awards and recognition from international organizations
4. Worldwide multimedia reach
5. Longevity
6. Accomplishments (in relation to the organization's cause)
*The organization's goals must be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound.

Each of this criteria can be further broken down into its components.

If Missosology can do this, it will indeed move closer to its identity as 'The Science of Beauty'
and further cement its status as The Authority in beauty pageant analyses and rankings.
It will be like the Michelin Organization giving stars to restaurants.

[hauteegirl]

Big FOUR only

[Virginia Dalisay]

Correct me if i'm wrong.. MGI is older than Miss Supranational yet Missosology consider the later as the 5th in ranking, which eventually, and i presume, provoked and angers Nawat. And in retaliation and revenge he will not give the golden crown to any filipina....... Right or wrong?

[Totoypasiboy]

Correct me if i'm wrong.. MGI is older than Miss Supranational yet Missosology consider the later as the 5th in ranking which eventually and i presume provoked and angers Nawat. And in retaliation and revenge he will not give the golden crown to any filipina....... Right or wrong?

Miss Supranational is five years older. Miss Supranational was established in 2009 and MGI in 2013.

[XAMURAI]

You know what? The good thing about Missosology is that, we let the people decide or interpret which is ranked 1 or bottom. That is why when I developed the Big5 Ranking, we gave equal point distribution to all pageants. No pageant gets higher points for their winners no matter when it was held, and how many delegates were there.




.

[pippo93]

1. HISTORY
2. QUALITY OF WINNERS AND DELEGATES
3. INTERNATIONAL REPUTATION
4. GOOD PRODUCTION
5. INTERNATIONAL MEDIA COVERAGE
4. SOCIAL AND HUMANITARIAN WORKS
5. HOW THEY PROJECT WOMEN IMAGE
6. HOW THEY ARE ABLE TO EVOLVE WITH THE CHANGES OF THE SOCIETY

FOR ME, THE REAL BIG PAGEANT ARE ONLY TWO:
MISS UNIVERSE AND MISS WORLD.
NO ONE IS NEAR TO THEM, THAT I CONSIDER "THE ELITE PAGEANT".
ELITE PAGEANT: MISS UNIVERSE AND MISS WORLD
BIG PAGEANT: MISS INTERNATIONAL AND MISS EARTH
GOOD PAGEANT: MISS SUPRANATIONAL
MINOR PAGEANT: MISS GRAND INTERNATIONAL AND MISS INTERCONTINENTAL

[ne0n]

I agree that everyone will have different perception of what a major or minor pageant is so it is quite futile for just one to rank them accordingly.

Each pageant serves a different audience and I believe that they can co-exist without the need to malign each other or prove who is better. Also, the fans should learn to elevate pageantry instead of creating an environment that thrives in toxicity since it will, in the end, reflect on all of us.

[Geeyourhair]

So Missosology is right all along

To be considered major:

Judging criteria should be clear and the winner is determined through a legit judging process and the presence of an auditing firm to have the results credible.

Only Big-4

[psyche of earth]

Great output guys!

I think the following are objective and measurable criteria:

1. Affiliations from humanitarian international organizations
2. Number of participating countries and number of franchises
3. Awards and recognition from international organizations
4. Worldwide multimedia reach
5. Longevity
6. Accomplishments (in relation to the organization's cause)
*The organization's goals must be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound.

Each of this criteria can be further broken down into its components.

If Missosology can do this, it will indeed move closer to its identity as 'The Science of Beauty'
and further cement its status as The Authority in beauty pageant analyses and rankings.
It will be like the Michelin Organization giving stars to restaurants.

I agree with all the 6 criteria you summed up. The "Branding" should also be a deal. It must be original with sense Universe, World, Earth, International to some extent supranational. We see now many pageants with these names attached. I think it is absurd. Plus the organization must have professionalism. By the way, I like the respectful and intellectual discussion in this thread.

[Bonitillo Campanella]

The pageant must have great CAUSE and affiliated with many REPUTABLE Organization that backs them up like United Nation, Unicef, Smile Train, etc. that is why only Miss Universe, Miss World, Miss International and Miss Earth (the big Four) are cut above the rest and considered as Major Pageants

Also, these pageants have been around for a while now. ME being the most recent one has been around for 20 years!

Don't get me wrong, ME is not my favorite but l don't really hate it....

l know this whole thread it's about MGI but they are still far away from being in the "Top 5"

[RainBernardi]

Only the classic 3:
Miss Universe
Miss World
Miss International

[radagasdas]

The standards to use in ranking pageants is quite nebulous because each individual has his/her own preferences; however, at least the following criteria should be ticked.

1. Recognition by reputable international organizations and global big media outlets.
2. Popularity
3. Relevance of the pageant’s cause to society
4. Number of participating countries - this should not be equated to popularity or relevance coz pageants have varying franchise fees. Some are expensive while others are cheap (even giving free fees to some participating countries).
5. Production/entertainment value during finals
6. Quality of activities for the contestants leading up to the pageant finals

The best way to end all this brouhaha....is to review all the involved pageants on their respective statuses. The criteria should be set on every 5 years or 10 years from the last set of appraisal reviews or ratings, very much like a Moodys or Fitch Ratings (on credit ratings). But this should be based on performance ratings of all pageants involved.

After 5 years or 10 years, Question will be like "did the international pageants retained their respective statuses? Like Big Four, Big Five etc.
This is also applies to Male pageants and others. Which should be Upgraded or Downgraded with further evaluations or explanations? Do we, the fans, be included in the vote to determine their fate?

If we talked about the Big Four, when was the last time they were called the Big Four? Do we need to keep the original Big Three? Do we need to kill a non-compliant pageant in the Big Four? How or when will the non-compliant pageant be reinstated to the Big Four? How many pageants to be stringently reviewed? 5, 6, 7, 8 or more?

Everyone is free to add their opinions or views. Thanks for reading!

[radagasdas]

The standards to use in ranking pageants is quite nebulous because each individual has his/her own preferences; however, at least the following criteria should be ticked.

1. Recognition by reputable international organizations and global big media outlets.
2. Popularity
3. Relevance of the pageant’s cause to society
4. Number of participating countries - this should not be equated to popularity or relevance coz pageants have varying franchise fees. Some are expensive while others are cheap (even giving free fees to some participating countries).
5. Production/entertainment value during finals
6. Quality of activities for the contestants leading up to the pageant finals

The best way to end all this brouhaha....is to review all the involved pageants on their respective statuses. The criteria should be set on every 5 years or 10 years from the last set of appraisal reviews or ratings, very much like a Moodys or Fitch Ratings (on credit ratings). But this should be based on performance ratings of all pageants involved.

After 5 years or 10 years, Question will be like "did the international pageants retained their respective statuses? Like Big Four, Big Five etc.
This is also applies to Male pageants and others. Which should be Upgraded or Downgraded with further evaluations or explanations? Do we, the fans, be included in the vote to determine their fate?

If we talked about the Big Four, when was the last time they were called the Big Four? Do we need to keep the original Big Three? Do we need to kill a non-compliant pageant in the Big Four? How or when will the non-compliant pageant be reinstated to the Big Four? How many pageants to be stringently reviewed? 5, 6, 7, 8 or more?

Everyone is free to add their opinions or views. Thanks for reading!

In addition to my post, I will used the criteria given by Stoichio as follows -

PERMANENT

PROBATIONARY

TERMINATED

If all the pageants failed to score in a given bracket with equivalent status below -

6 out of 6 - PERMANENT

4 and 5 out of 6 - PROBATIONARY

Below 4 out of 6 - TERMINATED

If Miss Universe, Miss World, Miss International and Miss Earth can loose their statuses and failed to meet their criteria requirements, they will be re-rank regardless of their formation years. They need to work harder to retain their position. They need to stay competitive or else they will be at the rock bottom.