Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Souza


 * 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. Secret account 17:20, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Justin Souza

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable run of the mill minor league player. Fails GNG--Yankees10 03:29, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Non-notable former minor leaguer. I found these articles, though, , , . Alex (talk) 04:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The second and fourth one are about as routine as it gets.--Yankees10 04:47, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I used the Widlansky Principle when selecting those ones. Alex (talk) 04:50, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what that means.--Yankees10 04:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I refer you to the protracted AfD discussion we had on Robbie Widlansky. Apparently being named in a lot of links is good enough to pass WP:GNG, even if mention the player is in a fleeting manner over and over. However, snark aside, the links I provided mention him at least somewhat in depth, they don't just give him a line like on a transaction page. But really it doesn't even matter since I voted delete anyway. Alex (talk) 07:00, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Also found, , . They all come from the same newspaper, but some of them are quite in depth, so I'll switch my vote to Weak Keep. Alex (talk) 01:26, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:31, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete, perhaps it is too soon for the subject to be considered notable per WP:GNG. Subject has received multiple trivial mentions in multiple reliable sources, but not enough sources where the subject has received significant coverage. The sources where the subject of this AfD has received significant coverage is this one from SFGate, and this one from Lodi News; the first has the subject of this AfD as the primary subject of the content, whereas the second has the subject as a secondary subject. I would say both would provide significant coverage, but these two in and of themselves do not appear to be sufficient to meet WP:GNG, yet (maybe one or two more). Subject has not played in the major league yet so fails WP:NBASEBALL. Therefore, it is my opinion that this article should be incubated by the primary content creator, and if the subject meets GNG or NBASEBALL in the future, resurrect it.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:44, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Alex (talk) 22:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Alex (talk) 22:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Alex (talk) 22:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete, doesn't have any significant sources that would pass GNG. Wizardman  15:52, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, the "Widlansky principle" is probably better known as WP:BOMBARD, and the presence of a pile of low-quality references is not a good reason to keep the article. Lankiveil (speak to me) 21:46, 15 November 2014 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dea  db  eef  21:47, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Mainly per WP:BASEBALL/N and WP:NSPORT. The guidelines for notability state that involvement at the major league level is presumed notable, and this player hasn't been. Although sources exist, I didn't find any reliable ones to verify notability. This player will probably become notable in the future (maybe even near future), but it's WP:TOOSOON to be an article right now.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Currently fails WP:GNG, too soon. Becky Sayles (talk) 07:39, 19 November 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.