Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Langford


 * 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. Tone 15:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Andrew Langford

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Was originally deleted through Prod. Then re-created as a redirect to the footballer Andy Langford. Was then turned into an article about this basketball player/coach. Redirect was restored and article was recreated. Speedy was declined due to playing professional basketball. However, the team he played for does not qualify for WP:NBASKET (the correct link, which isn't in the current article is this. So, fails both WP:GNG and WP:NBASKET.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete as the recreation of previously deleted material that obviously does not pass Wikipedia guidelines.--User:Namiba 13:44, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:44, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete I requested the CSD of this article yesterday (declined), basically per this AfD nomination the subject fails GNG and NBASKET JW 1961   Talk  13:56, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Fails WP:GNG. Cuoxo (talk) 14:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete not all professional sportspeople are notable. He does not even meet our basketball notability guidelines, these guidelines are also ludicrously broad but that is a different issue.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:46, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Devoke water   (talk)  17:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment It was deleted via WP:PROD before, so a speedy delete due to recreation would not apply here.—Bagumba (talk) 01:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. It was not deleted after a deletion discussion. Recreating after a proposed deletion is no different from contesting the prod. Not opposed to deletion, but imo it's not eligible for speedy deletion under WP:G4, WP:G11 or WP:A7. As the declining admin I'd also note that, in addition to the playing claim, there's a claim to coach British Basketball to be considered (which I didn't mention in the edit summary but did consider in the decline). Espresso Addict (talk) 01:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - apologies if I was unclear in the nom. The article was not speedied as a G4 (or G11, although I don't think anyone is alluding to this being a promotional article), but as per A7, indicating a lack of importance, which is not the same as notability. I was not inferring or attempting to infer, there was an issue with the decline of the speedy, I was simply attempting to provide a Reader's Digest history of the article. In my attempt to make things clearer, I apparently muddied the waters.  Onel 5969  TT me 02:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem at all with your nomination statement, ; my comment (which edit conflicted with Bagumba's) was in response to the repeated calls for speedy deletion above and especially "as the recreation of previously deleted material" (G4) from . I mentioned G11 because articles on borderline notable subjects that just pass A7 are often deleted G11 instead, and so I had also considered that rationale. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , cool. I was just concerned because sometimes when you write something, it sounds different in other peoples' heads than it does in yours, so I wanted to make it clear what my intent was.  Onel 5969  TT me 03:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:GNG. There seems not to be any evidence of his own professional career, and being a private coach for a single player is not inherently notable. Bearian (talk) 18:40, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete and SALT to prevent future creation. It had been deleted via PROD before, now it's identically recreated. It's obviously just Andrew himself (or someone very close to him) who wants to see him on Wikipedia. Subject fails GNG. SportsGuy789 (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2021 (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.