Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghassan Sarkis


 * 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 no consensus.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 16:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Ghassan Sarkis

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:NBASKETBALL "Basketball figures are presumed notable if they Have appeared in one game as either a player or head coach in the original American Basketball Association, Liga ACB, EuroLeague, National Basketball Association, National Basketball League (Australia), National Basketball League (United States), Lega Basket Serie A, Women's National Basketball Association, Greek Basket League, or Israeli Basketball Premier League. Were selected in the first two rounds of the NBA draft. Have won an award, or led the league in a major statistical category, of the Continental Basketball Association or NBA G League." Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lebanon-related deletion discussions. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment - Failing WP:NBASKETBALL is irrelevant as it only means that the subject is likely to have the significant coverage to pass WP:GNG, not that it doesn't. Did you perform a WP:BEFORE, especially in Arabic sources, to see if there are any coverage on the subject before nominating it for deletion? I would say this (already in the article) would go towards him passing WP:GNG and according to it he has been very successful in his home contry. Alvaldi (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I note the L'Orient Le Jour piece is an interview and wouldn't count towards GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:28, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The later part of the L'Orient Le Jour piece is indeed an interview but the first half of it goes into the subject in detail and thus goes towards WP:GNG. I'm still interested to know if any search for sources was done prior to the Afd nomination as a search in his native media is vital to prevent WP:BIAS. Alvaldi (talk) 12:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:NBASKET. There is some routine coverage, but not enough in-depth.  Onel 5969  TT me 03:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom and Onel. 2603:7000:2143:8500:D91F:C20D:8A2D:7B46 (talk) 23:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Unfortunately, these are paywalled, but they suggest that a wealth of coverage does exist:, , , , . (And that's just one English-language paper.) In the interest of combatting systemic bias, we need to give this article a chance to develop. Zagal e jo (talk) 00:10, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mojo Hand (talk) 14:38, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think we can without evidence that the paywalled articles provide GNG level coverage assume that they do. That would introduce a bias against subjects that indeed have verified GNG coverage. GNG does not indicate that it contemplates us making such unverified assumptions. 2603:7000:2143:8500:9979:940B:2D8A:6CEF (talk) 19:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * In fact, I was briefly able to read some of them in their entirety before posting the links here. I must have hit my free article limit. From what I saw, they were multiple paragraph articles, primarily focused on Sarkis himself. If nothing else, I think there's enough to suggest that sufficient material is likely to exist. Similarly, I wouldn't expect to see a news report like this for some random nobody. Zagal e jo (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not think GNG has an exception for where material is likely to exist. I still think it is a delete, and anyone thinking it is a keep on that basis is not supplying a view supported by GNG. 2603:7000:2143:8500:9979:940B:2D8A:6CEF (talk) 23:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I know at least some of the Daily Star articles should count towards the GNG, and a couple other sources have been presented in this discussion, so I’m satisfied the coach is notable enough. If I had easier access to sources, and an understanding of Arabic, I would try to expand the article. Unfortunately, there’s only so much I can do myself. (I don’t know if this is a problem on my end, but I can’t even translate any of the promising Arabic sources with Google Translate.) We really need some more Lebanese editors to help out with this article. Zagal e jo (talk) 02:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't see it as meeting gng with what we have now. And do not think we should as you suggest vote keep because we imagine the material likely exists. But if someone finds gng articles that are sufficient, I would be open to changing my mind.2603:7000:2143:8500:5146:8732:655B:4E69 (talk) 03:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Ghassan Sarkis is a highly decorated coach on both national and international levels who clearly passes WP:SPORTSPERSON. Somehow this discussion has gone on for over ten days without anyone citing this guideline, or indeed any of the achievements listed in the article. Aside from the given sources, which show many more honors than are included in the article, the following link [] is a thorough listing of Sarkis's accomplishments over the past two decades.

Also noteworthy is that the Wikipedia articles Basketball in Lebanon and Lebanese Basketball League specifically name Ghassan Sarkis as a notable coach, yet the nominator fails to mention it in his boilerplate statement. While I do not maintain this alone ends the argument, I do question the propriety of erasing articles that good faith editors request without a serious, fact-based discussion.  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:57, 6 June 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.