Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colin Brinded


 * 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 speedy keep. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 15:05, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Colin Brinded

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

For being such a "well respected" referee, I cannot find much on Brinded outside of obituaries and one-sentence mentions of him as referee for various matches (e.g. "Colin Brinded, the referee, made no such move..."). I do not see how he is any more than a guy doing his job. Primefac (talk) 13:36, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think a BBC obituary is probably sufficient for notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:07, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep:- I would have to agree with . In addition to the BBC, I also found The Irish Times, Supreme Snooker, The Guardian, Snooker.pl, Short News, The Free Library, Times of malta, The Independent News, This book, Snooker Referees and Officials, The Telegraph, The eurosport, The Independent News, The Telegraph and Argus, Breaking News, The Scotsman, Wales online to mention few. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 22:24, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I suppose this is my issue, though, that only one of your non-obit references discuss Brinded in any significant detail, which is one of the cornerstones of GNG. Primefac (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Be that as it may, it is a long-established consensus in AfDs that an obituary in even one major national media outlet such as a number of those listed above is sufficient for notability. Essentially, if they consider an individual notable enough for an obituary it would be more than faintly ridiculous for us, an encyclopaedia with approaching 5 million articles, not to consider them notable enough for an article. Their standards of notability for obituaries are actually far more stringent than ours for articles (any pointless minor celebrity who's been chattered about a lot now but will be forgotten next year or sportsperson who's played a single game at a top level and then disappeared, for instance). Wikipedia is not bound by strict rules but by consensuses created by its editors. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:11, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * , you make some very valid points. I will keep them in mind for next time. Primefac (talk) 15:04, 10 June 2015 (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.