Talk:Roley Young

De PRODing
Hi.

I note you have dePRODed on the basis that the article's subject meets WP:RLN. As you will be aware a subject notability guideline (SNG) does not trump WP:GNG. Can you please advise how this article satisfies the GNG ? In the mean time, if the article's subject is sufficiently notable surely it should be able to be linked to from some other article, and hence could you please do so.

Regards. Eno Lirpa (talk) 11:58, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Eno, I agree that the subject guidelines just create an assumption of notability, but that articles still have to meet GNG. One of the rationales for the assumptions is because older sources are not often online. This policy helps avoid recentism - avoiding a situation where all current players have articles but not all older players. As you can see, I was able to add two additional independent sources in five minutes yesterday. One was a paper article that was digitialised, which indicates that there is plenty of coverage there - someone just needs the time to develop the article further. Mattlore (talk) 20:24, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I found the digitised paper too, before I PRODed. I even checked TROVE, but found nothing.  Yes fully agree re recentism - google is mostly blind to anything over ten years old.  The digitised source is only the briefest of mentions and is only very ordinary routine sports reporting.  There is no indication of anything that will allow an in-depth article to ever be developed, and if the the player really is notable why do they only ever appear once in the digitised publication of the time ?   Sorry, but you have not convinced me at all.   Aoziwe (talk) 00:54, 2 August 2017 (UTC)  Got my self confused about which article I was watching !!  But my comment still stands.   Aoziwe (talk) 01:00, 2 August 2017 (UTC)