Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dick Pierce


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Dick Pierce

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

There was a guy named Pierce who played four games at guard during the 1920 Chicago Tigers season. Sources disagree as to who this Pierce was.


 * Dick Pierce - According to Pro-Football-Reference.com, the Tigers' guard was "Dick", born 1896 and died 1966 in Detroit.


 * Floyd Pierce - According to Pro Football Archives, the Tigers' guard was "Floyd", born in 1893 in Ypsilanti, Michigan, died in 1954 in Los Angeles County.

I created the article 12 years ago based on Pro-Football-Reference.com's assertion that it was "Dick." That assertion has now been called into doubt, and so we cannot verify whether or not WP:NGRIDIRON actually applies. Further, and after 12 years, my searches have failed to turn up WP:SIGCOV that would satisfy WP:GNG. Accordingly, it's time for this one to go. At least until the mystery is solved, an entry at List of National Football League players with unidentified given names would be the better place for this.

As there has been previous discussion of this, I am pinging the participants in that discussion. Cbl62 (talk) 17:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Georgia (U.S. state),  and Michigan.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: Given the commonness of the name Richard/Dick Pierce, I don't think a redirect is a good idea. Frankly Dick Pierce should probably redirect to the Richard Pierce disambiguation page. Cbl62 (talk) 17:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete we have no actual cases of significant coverage. I think this is a clear indication of why we need to stop creating articles based only on sports databases.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Pro-Football-Reference is a very reliable source, but the questions about this particular entry are too significant to ignore. Cbl62 (talk) 17:42, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You literally said earlier this month "it makes sense to consider anyone who played in maybe 3 games in the NFL to be default notable," yet now you're saying to delete an article on a person who played more than that amount of games. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * That was conditioned on a maybe. Beyond that, it may have been spoken too fast, as has much of the notability guidelines. Anyway, default notability is a consideration that when challenged needs to be supported by actual sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep, these AFDs on NSPORT-passing people are saddening and make me feel like quitting WP. Pierce (it appears to be Dick Pierce from what I've seen) played four games in the National Football League, the highest level of the sport there ever was, and thus meets WP:NGRIDIRON, which states: players and head coaches are presumed notable if they: Have appeared in at least one regular season or post-season game in any one of the following professional leagues: ... National Football League And I read in NSPORT in bold: The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below. That's an or. And if that's "not a valid reason," then consider me !voting on IAR grounds, as I think deleting NFL player articles do not at all improve the encyclopedia. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Beanie -- This case is really sui generis. And this AfD is not an attack on NGRIDIRON. Rather, and IMO, this is a really odd case in which we really don't have a sufficient basis here for even demonstrating that NGRIDIRON applies. Cbl62 (talk) 00:13, 1 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete From what I understand, Cbl62 is not questioning NGRIDIRON. However, if we don't have any idea of who this player is, and especially if we can't find any RS about him, then that is grounds for deletion. At the very least, information about this player needs to be verifiable, and it seems like it is not at this point. Natg 19 (talk) 22:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Just as an aside, it possible that there just happened to be 2 players with the same last name that played for the Chicago Tigers in 1920? I guess it would be an odd coincidence if they both happened to only play 4 games. Natg 19 (talk) 22:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 * For there to have been two men with the same last name, both playing exactly four games, both at the same position and for the same team in the same year strikes me as highly, highly improbable. Rather, it appears that there was a single "Pierce" who played the four games at guard, and we just don't know if it was Dick or Floyd. Cbl62 (talk) 00:13, 1 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Therapyisgood (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per Cbl62. If we cannot verify who the subject of the article actually is and do so with reliable sourcing then there should not be an article. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:05, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. If someone has a Newspapers.com subscription, an old Coffin Corner article suggests there might be a limited accounting of 1920 Chicago Tigers players in the Rock Island Argus from Dec. 2, 1920, by Bruce Copeland. It's possible that could clear up his name (but unlikely to provide SIGCOV). JoelleJay (talk) 23:11, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Presumably, that's a reference to the all-pro team announced by the Argus on 12/2/20. Pierce was not among those selected. See here for the actual clipping. Cbl62 (talk) 13:39, 7 March 2022 (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.