Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Negrych


 * 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   keep. j⚛e deckertalk 00:46, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Jim Negrych

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable minor league baseball player Spanneraol (talk) 18:39, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Spanneraol (talk) 18:41, 25 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NCOLLATH. Negrych won All-American status as a college baseball player twice.--TM 10:31, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:50, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:50, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable. Being an All-American in college baseball doesn't mean automatically notable.--Yankees10 18:02, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep There's enough coverage here to pass WP:GNG. And, WP:GNG trumps all other WikiProject-specific notability guidelines. Ejgreen77 (talk) 01:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it passes GNG. All of the coverage seems to be routine to me.--Yankees10 02:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The Buffalo News ran multiple front-page "hometown-boy-does-good" feature articles about him during the time he spent playing for the Bisons. There's nothing "routine" about that. Ejgreen77 (talk) 02:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I see two there. Hardly "significant" coverage.--Yankees10 02:22, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems significant to me.--TM 11:33, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No sorry but two is most certainly not enough to pass GNG.--Yankees10 16:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Per WP:GNG "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." Two is certainly "multiple" sources, so that can certainly be enough to pass GNG.  And even "multiple" sources are not necessarily required, but rather "generally expected," although I agree with you to the extent that in this case that I see no reason to dispense with the general expectation. Rlendog (talk) 18:02, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The bigger problem with the Buffalo News articles is that they are both from the same publisher, and thus essentially only one source. On the other hand, there is some non-trivial coverage from the Pittsburgh newspaper. Rlendog (talk) 18:16, 1 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - in addition to the sources discussed above, I found a story by Yahoo! Sports and two from the Orchard Park Bee  .  So I think he has enough to meet GNG. Rlendog (talk) 18:45, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets GNG per Rlendog and Namiba. -- do  ncr  am  03:51, 2 May 2014 (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.