Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics – Boys' javelin throw


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Owen&times; &#9742;  23:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics – Boys' javelin throw

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The only independent sourcing are a few sources mentioning the win of Botha (and of the four sources in the article, one is a Wordpress blog about Mandela day, and one is the Italian Athletics Federation, not an independent source but responsible for sending athletes to the championships), no actual coverage of the event as a whole, no WP:SUSTAINED coverage either. Fram (talk) 11:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Sports. Fram (talk) 11:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  11:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep as creator, thank you for nominating the article because it allows us to improve it. The event has WP:GNG coverage from News24 (with several articles) and the Atletismo Español magazine. I would expect there to be coverage in other athletics publications like Athletics Weekly and Track & Field News as well. I want to address all the concerns in the nomination:


 * The sources only mention the win of Botha, no actual coverage of the event as a whole – The nature of individual athletics events is that coverage will focus on the winners or athletes at the events, as the event itself is a more abstract concept. The articles aren't solely about the winner though, they usually do talk about other placings or the competition itself even if the headline only mentions the winner.
 * The only independent sourcing are those simply mentioning Botha – I don't agree with this, for example here are some fully independent sources covering mainly athletes other than Botha: ,
 * There are only four sources in the article – I have since fixed this, and I expanded the article to include eight sources (not including the results source).
 * There is no WP:SUSTAINED coverage – I don't agree with this, for example Paul Botha was still being described as a "world youth champion" in reference to this event almost two years later in Javelin Throw Magazine. World championships are the highest level of competition in the sport, and in athletics journalism references are frequently made to past championships and events.


 * So for these reasons, I am voting to keep, and I'll continue to improve the article in the mean time. --Habst (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2. Atletismo Espanol is published by the RFEA, so is not independent. Eesti contains a routine, trivial results report, not SIGCOV. 4. SUSTAINED requires sustained SIGCOV of an event. Mentions do not count. JoelleJay (talk) 19:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @JoelleJay, thank you for the challenge because I think debate like this improves Wikipedia, I'm sorry for missing it yesterday. I think I addressed point #2 at this anchor: . Regarding #4, I just read the page WP:SUSTAINED and "SIGCOV" is never mentioned, so I don't think that is the Wikipedia consensus on that guideline. As the article is a results list primarily, I don't think that matters anyways, per Category:List-Class Athletics articles and WP:NLIST which says that lists provided as navigation aids can be kept using different criteria, which I have outlined below. Thank you, --Habst (talk) 00:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * "World championships are the highest level of competition in the sport" - true, but World youth championships are not. It is an intermediary step in a career. Most of these people never amounted to athletes on the highest level as adults. Geschichte (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Geschichte, thank you for responding and I do fully agree with your comment that World U18 Championships are not as important as the senior World Athletics Championships. My comment wasn't meant to say to the contrary -- only to say that both can have sustained coverage, and on the merits of this specific competition the article should be kept. As you say, most Olympic medalists have success on the youth level before the senior level, which is partly why it is important to cover these championships.
 * In my case, I was writing an article for an athlete (Manu Quijera) who was 4th in this event, and his 4th-place showing was a significant part of his career. Because the main championships page only shows the top 3 medalists, he was not linked from that page which necessitated the creation of this article. Given that this event was an important part of his career according to the sources, I thought there should be some sort of backlink from "2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics" to Manu Quijera, and currently creating results pages is the established way to do that. --Habst (talk) 21:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * While writing Toni Keränen, I found this article: Even though he didn't compete at the championships, I thought it was interesting that an entire article was written about a performance in relation to this event. To me this is further evidence of WP:EVENTCRIT point #2 because it shows that the result had international significance even among non-competitors, and the result was analyzed after the fact. If I can find other sources like this, I might make a "reactions" section of the article as well. --Habst (talk) 04:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen&times; &#9742;  01:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Finland probably didn't compete in the championships. Norway skipped the 2017 edition (as did numerous other nations), and also had a history of doing so. Check this out and search for World Youth Championships. You will see that Norway also opted out of the 1999, 2001 and 2003 edition and sent a very limited number to the 2005 and 2007 editions. All this tells us that the World Youth Champnships struggled with its standing in the world of athletics. That being said, I don't have a strong opinion about the 2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics – Boys' javelin throw page. Geschichte (talk) 13:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Geschichte, thank you for the interesting statistics. I remember when the World Youth Championships were cancelled in 2017, and thinking that it kind of made sense in part due to all the age cheating that was in the news at the time. I believe the U.S. also passed on the final edition, though it was no doubt the most notable U18 athletics competition in the world during its existence despite these omissions. For the record, individual event articles are common practice at even regional competitions like the Asian Games and Asian Athletics Champs, as well as the World U20 Championships and of course the Worlds and Olympics.
 * In my opinion, we should decide on the presence of event articles based on their own merits, and I think I've shown above that WP:EVENTCRIT is satisfied. Another perspective would be that results articles would fall under WP:NLIST, that is, fulfilling a recognized navigatory aid as viewers move between events at the 2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics, or using it as an index of the articles for performers at that event. In that case, it might be kept regardless of notability, as it serves as an aid to the bigger parent article which already has its own notability. --Habst (talk) 01:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Zero significant independent secondary coverage. NSPORT is explicit that governing sports orgs do not contribute to notability. Source 0 (worldathletics.org): pure stats, non-independent . 1 (News24 1): written by someone paid to attend by IAAF and accommodated by the Colombian Athletics Federation, non-independent and not comprehensive coverage of the event anyway . 2 (ERR): trivial results report, not SIGCOV . 3 (News24 2): same author as #1 . 4 (FIDAL): non-independent athletics org . 5 (Cape Town in Color blog): WordPress blog, SPS and obviously not RS . 6 (Netwerk24): can't access, but seems to be coverage of Botha rather than the event. 7 (Atletismo Espanol): published by the Royal Spanish Athletics Federation, a non-independent governing org . 8 (UZ Athletics): Uzbekistan athletics org, non-independent . 9 (yleisurheilu.fi): Finnish Sports Association, non-independent . 10 (IOC): IOC profile, non-independent.
 * JoelleJay (talk) 19:28, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @JoelleJay, thank you for responding because I think rigorous debate and your challenge makes Wikipedia better, even when I do not agree.
 * I want to respond to all the points you made, so I will do it by list:
 * 1. News24: written by someone paid to attend by IAAF –  This is false, per the article: His accommodation was paid for by the Colombian athletics federation.. He was of course allowed to attend by the IAAF, just as with any event held on private property, journalists can't simply trespass without permission. But he was never paid by the IAAF. The Colombian Athletics Federation had no role in organizing the World Youth Championships (much less the javelin throw) and the source is thus independent.
 * 2. Per WP:NBASIC (that applies to biographies but the same principle applies to events), sources can be combined to demonstrate notability. Eesti Rahvusringhääling is an established newspaper that is completely independent of the article subject, and the fact that they chose to cover this specific event in a dedicated fashion, rather than simply recapping the entire meet and only dedicating one section to the boys' javelin, demonstrates the notability of the event.
 * 3. Per #1, the assertion that the author was "paid to attend by the IAAF" is plainly false.
 * 4. FIDAL is independent of the subject (boy's javelin throw at the 2015 World Youth Champs), because it had no role in organizing or promoting the event – as an organization, it is completely separate. Just because an organization is dedicated to athletics, does not mean we can't use its reporting on athletics-related subjects. For example, Track & Field News and Athletics Weekly are "athletics organizations", but nobody would doubt that their coverage of the World Championships is independent in the same way that ESPN is independent of many of the major sports events they cover.
 * 5. The Cape Town in Color blog can be used to demonstrate notability because it is from a non-athletics-related organization and chose, again, to dedicate significant portions of coverage on this specific event at these specific championships. Also, it is written by a subject matter expert, and this article is not a BLP, therefore it is suitable for inclusion in the article.
 * 6. seems to be coverage of Botha rather than the event – This is incorrect, the article covers the other competitors in the event in addition to Botha. Of course, the article is focused on the winner, as nearly all sports competition coverage does. But the event as a whole is covered.
 * 7. The Royal Spanish Athletics Federation is independent of the subject, the 2015 World Youth Championships boys' javelin throw. This is because it had no role in hosting or promoting the subject. The fact that it may be funded by a government doesn't mean it isn't independent, it depends on the specific case – just as the BBC News could be used as a source even though they are funded by a government.
 * 8. Per #7, athletics federations (there are hundreds of them) are independent. They would not be independent about matters of governance related to their own organization, but on matters of global athletics competition, they are independent.
 * 9. Per #7, the Finnish Sports Association had no role in organizing or promoting the event; it is independent.
 * 10. The IOC biography was used to demonstrate the event's effect on the career of one of the competitors. The IOC actually does not host or organize the World Youth Championships; World Athletics does – so I'm not sure how it isn't an independent source of the subject anyways.
 * Thank you, --Habst (talk) 00:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The travel and entrance fees of IAAF media affiliates to the event would of course be covered "courtesy the IAAF". Why else do you think they would disclose this in a disclaimer alongside their other funding? de Villiers works/ed for the IAAF, as do many, many other authors of athletics news stories. The CAF/RFEA is not independent of the athletes it sponsors or, obviously, the events its athletes and the organization itself participate in. This should be clear from the NSPORT guidance. Even if it somehow wasn't, both are IAAF member federations so are automatically disqualified through that avenue as well.Routine content does not contribute to notability. The Estonian article was a results update centered on an Estonian athlete that had exactly 1 out of 4 sentences not on that athlete.Since you seem to have access to the Netwerk24 article, please paste it here or provide an archive link. JoelleJay (talk) 02:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @JoelleJay, thank you for your challenge because I believe it improves Wikipedia.
 * The travel and entrance fees of IAAF media affiliates to the event would of course be covered "courtesy the IAAF" – This isn't what I was responding to, I was responding to the assertion above that the News24 article was written by someone paid to attend by IAAF. This is plainly false, and it was not stated in the article. Of course, the press does not have to pay for a ticket because they have a press pass, this is how media works at nearly all major events from concerts to festivals to sporting events. There is no evidence, however, that de Villier's travel was covered by World Athletics, and for what it's worth I would be very surprised to learn that is the case based on what I know about world athletics championships. Either way, being granted a press pass as a journalist in no way constitutes being "paid to attend by the IAAF", otherwise we would have to consider all press pass coverage invalid for Wikipedia. Based on the LinkedIn profile you linked, it seems like de Villers only briefly contracted for World Athletics and was never employed by them, and his work for them started after the 2015 World Youth Championships. I think that his work for News24 in relation to this subject is independent.


 * The CAF/RFEA is not independent of the athletes it sponsors – This would be true if the athletes that CAF/RFEA sponsors were hand-picked by the organizations based on the personal biases of administration officials. This isn't how it works in athletics, the purpose of Royal Spanish Athletics Federation (for example) is simply to promote and govern the sport of athletics in Spain. They would not be independent in matters relating to the organization itself, but they are independent of the subject when the subject is "boys' javelin throw at the 2017 World Youth Championships" because they had no role in organizing that event and no stake in its success.
 * In regards to the Estonian newspaper, it is just one of the eleven sources used in the article, it is a WP:RS, and its coverage of both the Estonian athlete and of the event in general is useful even if brief. The purpose of linking it wasn't about the article's length but to show that the subject is notable because there is dedicated coverage of it, even separate and apart from coverage of the 2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics as a whole. The event only happens once every two years, and in most cases coverage of the event cannot be planned because it is subject to the performances achieved at the event, which cannot be predicted.
 * Here is a section of the Netwerk24 article that pertains to the javelin throw:
 * "Paul Botha, spiesgooier van die Hoërskool Rustenburg, en Werner Visser, diskusgooier van die ­Hoërskool Zwartkop in Pretoria, is verantwoordelik vir dié twee goue medaljes. Botha het die spies met sy tweede gooi 78.49 m ver geslinger om die goud met die beste poging van sy loopbaan tot dusver te verower. Die ander Suid-Afrikaner in die eindronde van die spiesgooi, Hercules van Vuuren van die Bethlehem Voortrekker Hoërskool, moes met die vyfde plek ­tevrede wees. Hy het die spies 76.04 m ver laat grondvat."


 * Translated to English, it discusses not just Botha's throw but also Hercules van Vuuren, the other South African.
 * Furthermore, I believe our entire conversation about the independent coverage of the event is entirely moot because its primary purpose is a list; per WP:NLIST Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. This list of competitors provides a clear navigational aid to the athletics coverage on Wikipedia – as noted above, the original reason I created it was to provide a backlink from Manu Quijera to the competition that was a major part of his career, and event result list articles are the established practice on Wikipedia to do so. In addition, the redlink list is useful for others who may want to create new articles in the future.
 * Thank you, --Habst (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * IAAF member federations are part of the IAAF. It does not matter whether athletes are "hand-picked". Governing sports orgs are not independent when it comes to coverage of their athletes, which obviously extends to events they are involved in (because of course an org whose primary function is to promote its assets would facilitate ample coverage of its assets). Accommodations provided by the IAAF directly or via the Member Federation serving as the Local Organising Committee (in this case CAF) constitute a financial relationship. There is also no indication that de Villiers' employment relationship with IAAF was not in place for this competition, as he makes similar IAAF disclosure statements for other IAAF events he covered 2015-on. As I said before, the Estonian article contains one sentence of coverage on other competitors. That is trivial.This article is not a list or a table, it is an article on an event that contains some tables. Even if it was a list, NLIST does not say all lists fulfill navigational etc. purposes; the contents in this article would certainly constitute a non-encyclopedic cross-categorization; and its utility as a navigational aid is clearly undercut by most of the entries not having their own pages. If someone's main source of coverage is from an appearance that was not significant enough to warrant coverage on any other wikipedia pages, maybe that is saying something about their notability. JoelleJay (talk) 21:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @JoelleJay, thank you for your response.
 * IAAF member federations are part of the IAAF – This isn't true, according to the "member federations" page, World Athletics federations are merely "affiliated with" and not part of the larger organization. I think the question we should be asking when it comes to independence is, does the author or publisher have any role in organizing the event? In the case of this source, one of the 11 used in the article, I think the answer is "no":
 * Likewise, governing sports organizations are independent when it comes to events that athletes from their nation (not "their athletes", as the athletes are not employed by the governing organizations) compete in. To make this two-degree leap is like saying that Elvis Presley wouldn't be an independent source on Kevin Bacon, because they are two degrees apart.
 * The "accomodations" link you provided is for a totally separate competition, four years after the 2015 World Youth Championships took place. Also, on that page there's no indication to me that the hotel would be paid for by the IAAF, only that they would assist in being booked in the athlete hotel which would make sense for a journalist. To me, it really seems like a reach veering in to Pepe Silvia thinking, that there are so many degrees of connection required to say there is a "conflict of interest", in just one of the 11 sources provided. If you want, you can ask de Villiers himself if his work is independent of the subject of this article or to what degree he has a financial relationship with the IAAF, which is not even the subject of this article.
 * The Estonian article is the shortest of all the linked coverage, but it is useful as a reference and to be combined with other coverage, which is a valid way to assess notability.
 * These types of results articles are actually very often considered list-class, even if they have prose describing the event, as here are many examples of similar articles marked as Lists: Category:List-Class Athletics articles. This includes even the men's javelin throw at the same year's world championships, which is the closest possible article to this one. If you think that all of those articles are not lists, it would be against current Wikipedia practice and you would have to change that consensus first.
 * Which cross-categorization in this article is non-encyclopaedic? Javelin throwers and the 2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics seems like a reasonable categorization to make, as the two categories are inherently associated (one competes in the other). But I wouldn't say that this list is a cross-categorization at all, really, the main purpose of it is to be a navigational aid for Wikipedia coverage of the world championships.


 * Looking at WP:NOTCATALOG, 1. Ample contextual information is provided, 2. The topics are not loosely associated, 3. I don't think "cross-categorization" really applies to this article per above, 4. It's not a genealogical entry, 5. It's not a program guide, and 6. It has no commercial value and wouldn't be helpful for a business.
 * Of the 34 competitors in this list, 7 of them are currently blue links, and there are four inter-language links, i.e. athletes on other wikis that don't have an English article yet, so that is usually a very helpful pointer to article creators and I can see that many of the other red links are potential articles as well. This proves that the article serves an important purpose for editors, as well as being a helpful navigation aid for readers looking at who participated or was significant in a competition. Also, this event is not the "main source of coverage" for Manu Quijera, but it does represent one major starting point in his career, so it would be very useful to have a backlink from the event back to his page along with all of the other athlete pages.
 * Thank you, --Habst (talk) 00:37, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Your idea of what constitutes "independence" in the wiki-notability sense is intractably at odds with our guidelines. If you still do not understand--or refuse to acknowledge--the purpose of excluding governing sports bodies from the topics with which they are involved, then bring that up at NSPORT, not here. And of course the Member Federations are members of IAAF, what a ridiculous assertion. The term "affiliated to" does not just mean "loosely associated with", it has a precise legal meaning with regards to the subordinated relationship between the orgs and their governance. In this case the Members comprise the IAAF Congress, elect the IAAF council and executive board, and function as the highest authority in the IAAF. IAAF Rules state . The purposes of World Athletics include to: 1.1.1. encourage and support the development, organisation and delivery of Athletics worldwide through its Area Associations and Member Federations (Article 4.1(g) of the Constitution); and, 1.1.2. support and assist Area Associations and Member Federations to promote and develop Athletics (Article 4.1(h) of the Constitution). 1.2. The Member Federations are the Members of World Athletics (Article 6.1 of the Constitution) and as such, they enjoy rights and have obligations to World Athletics under the Constitution (Articles 8 and 9 of the Constitution). Members are not some random association from a particular country, they are required to be the sole national governing body for athletics in their country and are responsible for all athletes therein. Members are obligated to "compete in at least one International Competition or one Area Championships in the period between meetings of Ordinary Congress” and to organise in each calendar year at least one national senior championships. Member Federations are not independent of the IAAF.The purpose of the accommodations link was to demonstrate the type of form used by the press for receiving accreditation and accommodation. They use the same boilerplate form for all IAAF competitions, I didn't bother to track down the exact one. And anyway, we know de Villiers' accommodations were paid for by the LOC for the games, which is as close as you can get to the org actually running the event. JoelleJay (talk) 03:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @JoelleJay, thank you for your response because I do think these issues are important to work out.
 * I looked at WP:NSPORT, the policy you referenced, and the only thing it says about governing sports bodies is, Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players. I don't think that applies to this article, because the subject of the article is not the players, it is the competition "Boys' javelin throw at the 2015 World Youth Championships". NSPORT doesn't say anything about member federations not being independent with respect to competitions, and I don't think that view is at odds with Wikipedia guidelines, let alone intractably so.
 * Also, the member federations are hardly the highest authority in the IAAF, in fact they are often at odds with World Athletics i.e. in the case of Russian Athletics Federation. For a similar situation with World Aquatics, a U.S. court found that "a reasonable trier of fact could find FINA and its member federations are separate economic actors", i.e. if member federations are separate economic actors, then it would stand to reason they are financially independent.
 * Per the 2019 World XC form, my reading is still that journalists can be situated in the athlete hotel, but they would still have to pay for their own travel and board. If journalists at World Athletics championships really do get free hotel and travel, please tell me where I can apply as one, because then I have been wasting a lot of money attending as a fan for naught...
 * I do think that this notability conversation ultimately does not matter as it pertains to this article though, because I think Wikipedia considers it a list per Category:List-Class Athletics articles and WP:NLIST. As a list, it does not necessarily need to meet the notability guidelines because it serves as a navigational aid to readers. Even if you discard all the member federation sources, which I don't think should be done, there is still fully independent newspaper coverage of the event.
 * Thank you, --Habst (talk) 10:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You think that the lack of independence in a sports org's coverage of its athletes somehow doesn't apply when that same coverage is used for something else (let alone an event the org was involved in)? That makes zero sense and suggests you still don't understand the purpose of this guideline.The Member Federations comprise the majority of the IAAF and their Congress is explicitly called the "highest authority in the IAAF". This is per the IAAF Constitution and its rules book. It is perfectly acceptable to sanction one constituent, which is what the Members voted to do with RAF. Financial independence--which the Members certainly are not with regards to the parent structure, not least because they pay dues and receive support from the IAAF--is not the only criterion needed for wikipedia independence. I literally sent you a media accreditation and accommodations application, you should know what it says. You can find the one for some upcoming competition yourself.Very few lists don't need to meet notability criteria, so even if this was considered a list that is far from a guarantee that its navigational function is so overwhelmingly obvious that no sustained IRS SIGCOV of the topic as a whole is needed. Routine results announcements don't count for athletes because they fail NOT, which applies to all pages including this one. JoelleJay (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @JoelleJay, thank you for responding. I think that a national athletics federation's coverage of athletes from the same country actually can be independent, depending on the details of the coverage. I don't think that WP:NSPORT disagrees with that, I think that the line Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players is in reference to players representing a specific athletics team as opposed to athletes competing independently that happen to reside in the same country as some World Athletics member federation. I think that I do understand the guidelines, I am trying to interpret them as objectively as I can.
 * The World Athletics Congress may be the highest authority of athletics as a whole, but that isn't exactly the same thing as the member federations – per source, there are 214 member federations and each only has three delegates, i.e. any member federation only has a 1/214th stake and influence in Congress, and probably less than that because the Congress has a board and President which would overrule the delegates. It is such a tiny role, that I would have a hard time saying that there is any independence issue, especially because World Athletics is not the subject of this article.
 * FINA members pay dues ("membership fees") per source, and yet that did not stop a U.S. court from ruling that a reasonable trier of fact could find FINA and its member federations are separate economic actors. So, I would agree that World Athletics member federations are financially independent from each other for the purposes of Wikipedia.
 * The 2019 World XC form linked above doesn't say anything about World Athletics paying for the hotel and flights for journalists that I can see, it seems to only reference "accommodating" them as in making sure they are in the athlete hotel. If what you say is true and disqualifying, the implication is then that any journalist coverage of global athletics championships cannot be used on Wikipedia, regardless of who the journalist is, because the journalists were "accommodated" in a way that is not clear at all to me. Do the World Athletics procedures for "accommodating" journalists differ significantly from the industry standard for large international events? I don't think they do, and I haven't seen any comparison that they do.
 * I think that there is IRS SIGCOV of the subject, as there are thousands of words about the event from over 10 different sources linked in the article. However I also think that the navigational function of this list is clear – it is linked clearly from the parent page in a consistent manner that has been done for hundreds of similar articles on Wikipedia, and it clearly lists the finishing order and participants in the event surrounded by helpful context about the competition. There is also significant technical advantage to keeping the article, as the red-links are useful starting points for future article creators. Regarding WP:NOT, I did read that policy (specifically WP:NOTCATALOG) and I read all of the numbered points. I don't think that this article applies to any of those numbered points, as I enumerated above at.
 * Thank you, --Habst (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * "Governing sports organizations" means exactly what it says: they are not independent of players under their jurisdiction. Your "objective" interpretation both fails textually and in actual intent. I know this because I wrote that part of the guideline, after discussion at NSPORT that had unanimous agreement among 8 senior NSPORTS editors as well as a followup discussion that also had overwhelming support. This was the obvious outcome given what had been happening at athlete AfDs whenever editors gave heightened scrutiny to source independence. Non-independence from governing orgs continues to result in uncontroversial deletions on that basis.Again, we know de Villiers was accommodated by the event organizer. Whether they pay for all journalists is irrelevant to this AfD.NOT states that the examples given in each section are not exhaustive. Editors are assumed to be competent enough at inference and patterns to recognize instances that don't precisely match policy wording. And my invocation of NOT was re: NOTNEWS, where routine news coverage is discussed. The "list" having the bare-minimum technical characteristics of a page does not override its utter lack of navigational utility.Please stop prefacing your comments with those obnoxious facially insincere "thank yous". JoelleJay (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Re: Governing sports organizations – I greatly respect the work you have done for WP:NSPORT. At the same time, Wikipedia guidelines are not interpreted or enforced by any one person, even if that person was the original author of a guideline. Just as you linked examples of athlete biographies that were deleted for lack of sources, there are also examples of athlete biographies that were not deleted despite having no significant non-database sources linked, for example Kyohei Ushio or Abdou Manzo. As WP:NSPORT is a supplemental guideline, there is also always the possibility of an article meeting a core guideline like WP:GNG but not NSPORT anyways, such as in the case of Clive Sands. Of course, any source can sometimes be non-independent depending on context, but I don't think that national athletics federations are as a rule always non-independent of athletes who happen to live in the same country, especially if that athlete has never represented or associated with the federation.
 * we know de Villiers was accommodated by the event organizer – To be clear, the article in question only says, "Ockert attended the IAAF World Youth Championships courtesy of the IAAF. His accommodation was paid for by the Colombian athletics federation." That seems to say he was not accommodated by the IAAF but by the Colombian Athletics Federation instead. Also, I am not sure what this "accommodation" means, and I couldn't find any Wikipedia policies or guidelines saying that if a journalist is "accommodated" then his coverage is automatically deemed non-independent.
 * For WP:NOT, I did try to interpret meaning rather than wording in . For WP:NOTNEWS, I will go through the numbered points to see if it applies:
 * 1. Original reporting – I don't think this is original as the results are widely reported, 2. News reports – I don't think this list is a news report but an encylopedic record of competition results surrounded by context. I don't think the World Youth Championships are covered in a "routine" way, it only happens once every two years and the coverage is more often focused on the details of the specific events with commentary rather than using generic boilerplate. 3 Who's who – The subjects are covered in order of importance to the overall topic, with the medallists discussed most often and the other competitors being given less coverage. 4. Celebrity gossip and diary – Not applicable to this article.
 * I also do think that the list is navigationally useful – The reason why I created it was because I expected it to already exist, having read similar articles like the 2016 IAAF World U20 Championships. Many people use Wikipedia as a reference for athletics results at major championships, and the page is in line with existing articles to provide that service in an encyclopedic fashion.
 * With regard to your last comment – I wanted to say that I trust that your comments have all been 100% sincere, and I would hope that you would extend me the same good faith. I am sorry that my words were interpreted otherwise, and I would much rather discuss the article than editor behavior. --Habst (talk) 23:57, 6 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete. JoelleJay's source analysis is persuasive. The energy invested into this very niche article and this AfD is misplaced. The much more important parent articles, IAAF World Youth Championships in Athletics and 2015 World Youth Championships in Athletics, are in a catastrophic state. The time spent nitpicking borderline sources here would be better used to make them readable.  Sandstein   19:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Sandstein, I appreciate what you said and I'll make my response brief. Is the article niche? Yes, although that's not a valid reason for deletion. I would liken it to Guam at the 2015 World Championships in Athletics, which was kept despite the absurd specificity of the article. 'Importance' is all relative – to a certain few, this may be a very valuable article, which is enough of a reason to keep the article if it complies with Wikipedia policies. --Habst (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.