Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonio Penn


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:46, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Antonio Penn

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I previously Proded the article with the objection of that it fails WP:NCOLLATH and WP:GNG last week but it was removed by User:Authenticboy15. The article only cites minor sources, including YouTube. In any event he doesn't meet notability standards. Further note the Prod remover objected with the comment. "I’m a well established media coverage who takes part in many editing platforms for athletes and this athlete’s profile is accurate and legit. Matches information laid out just like many other great athletes detail on the Wikipedia platform. Doesn’t make sense to why it has been placed with a PROD. I removed the PROD because I strongly object. I don’t know the kid but I have tried to cover a story about him and did not get the chance to but I do continue to follow his..." They didn't reference any wiki guidelines UCO2009bluejay (talk) 20:42, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note Authenticboy15 has commented on the talk page of this AfD.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:17, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:17, 7 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete it seems that the pinnacle of his college football career was to play at Iowa Wesleyan University, a NCAA Division III school. There's of course nothing wrong with that and a division III player could achieve notability, but I see no indication of that to be true.  I'm finding no references in independent third party reliable sources, much less the significant coverage we need for inclusion in this encyclopedia.  The professional career seems to be with teams in the Indoor Football League, which does not indicate notability achievement as well.  If such sources were introduced, I'd be happy to change my position and we could include them in the article--but my research has led me here in this case.  I can only see that the subject fails WP:GNG, WP:BASIC, WP:NSPORTS, and any other notability guideline I can find.  Perhaps an enthusiastic editor will try another wiki more suitable, such as an online sports almanac.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:07, 7 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep (Article author). Subject information meets guidelines listed in Wiki guidelines references. Information is blueprinted in simplicit manner. Subject discussed on page is authentic individual, with reliable and authentic sources. Rather than nominate for deletion, why would you as editors not do research on the subject and provide more sources, if you don’t agree that the current sources are “good enough”? Indoor football leagues, as well as arena football leagues are just as notable as other professional leagues of football. Each notable athlete is not always recognized through media and articles, which should not held against them when articles are portrayed in promoting those type of athletes and their story/journey, particularly small schools. This particular issues, has me worried about my other articles I am working on as well. Who have been worked out by NFL teams but I guess that is not considered as high of a standard as playing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Authenticboy15 (talk • contribs) 03:06, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. Question what "other articles" ? The only logs in your history are for Antonio Penn, this discussion, and the talk page for this discussion.  In any event, athletes not being recognized through media and articles are precisely reasons not to include articles about them because such a case would not meet notability standards, especially for biographies of living persons.  I like your enthusiasm!--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. This player does not clear WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS. There have yet to be any sources provided that indicate notability beyond his achievements at a USCAA school and in semi-professional leagues. Typically, players that are the subject of notable coverage have achieved significant honors in Division I FBS and/or have played in the NFL. —Ostealthy (talk) 13:48, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. Also most of the citations that even suggest that are personal sites.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 21:06, 9 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - if the "Proposed Deletion" was previously rejected then this is a controversial case. The best way of moving forward with this article should be discussed on the talk page. Eucraic (talk) 21:51, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. An objection to WP:PROD does not make an article immune to WP:AFD discussions. Here is precisely the place.--Paul McDonald (talk) 22:09, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm sure "no" will suffice.   SITH   (talk)   21:30, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment As this is only your 7th edit on WP, you may not be familiar with WP:AFD for articles suspected of failing WP:GNG. Britishfinance (talk) 10:58, 13 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete: doesn't meet any of the WP:ATHLETE criteria, none of the sources are simultaneously independent, reliable and in-depth.   SITH   (talk)   21:30, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Cbl62 (talk) 15:39, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete on account of subject failing WP:ATHLETE. The nasty WP:COI aroma does not help. -The Gnome (talk) 05:57, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:ATHLETE. Written by a single purpose editor . Britishfinance (talk) 11:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * delete Typical sports reporting fails to meet the GNG and fails WP:NGRIDIRON. Sandals1 (talk) 18:00, 13 February 2019 (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.