Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Braylon Heard


 * 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. Deor (talk) 14:02, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Braylon Heard

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Prod contested by IP editor. Undrafted free agent who was cut in training camp, hasn't played a regular-season down in the NFL, and doesn't meet WP:NGRIDIRON or WP:GNG otherwise. -- Finngall  talk  00:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  00:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete His article indeed states "Offseason and/or practice squad member only" at the NFL. The pointed out WP:NGRIDIRON states a requirement of "at least one regular season or post season game in any one of the following professional leagues". --Mr. Magoo (talk) 02:04, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Though I have to admit I know little, and maybe it's a case of WP:TOOSOON if he might find success at the lesser professional leagues? In that case the result is the same, but with some comfort to anyone who wishes to keep as he may return. --Mr. Magoo (talk) 02:08, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete the only articles I can find are brief mentions that he "didn't make the cut" -- It's possible a player could be notable for a college career, but I don't see the sources to support that. Fails WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG with significant coverage in multiple repliable sources. His college stats aren't eye-catching (348 yards with Nebraska in 2012 and 368 yards with Kentucky in 2014), but the fact is that running backs from Division I FBS (top tier) schools get lots of media coverage.  In this case, there is significant coverage out there including (1) this from ESPN.com, (2) this from the Omaha World-Herald, (3) this from the Lexington Herald-Leader, (4) this from The Courier-Journal, (5) this from CBS Sports, (6) this from Sports Illustrated, and (7) this and (8) this from The Advocate-Messenger. Cbl62 (talk) 19:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I ask that this be re-listed so that new sources can be evaluated by others, including those previously casting "delete" votes. Cbl62 (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I switch to Neutral at this time. if CB says to re-evaluate, I think we should do that.  Don't have time now, will soon.--Paul McDonald (talk) 23:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: To evaluate new sources as requested. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 06:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 06:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 12:19, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Find me coverage in secondary sources and I'll readily support keeping, but when the best you can find to keep is primary sources such as news reports, you've confirmed the lack of notability.  Nyttend (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence he actually played in a fully pro game.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Routine sports coverage is not enough for WP:GNG and fails WP:NGRIDIRON. Mdtemp (talk) 08:37, 31 March 2016 (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.