Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ma Yexin


 * 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. Three relistings and opinions are divided between Keep and Draftify. As a closer, I can't act on my own point of view so my only option is to close this as No consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 00:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Ma Yexin

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

Fails WP:NTENNIS and WP:GNG. ITF W40 titles are not of a high enough level to meet WP:NTENNIS#4. They only have $40,000 in total prize money while NTENNIS requires at least $50,000. A GNG search brought up nothing close to significant coverage either. Iffy★Chat -- 13:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 13:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Tennis,  and China. Shellwood (talk) 13:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The only half-decent looking source I have been able to find (after searching in Chinese her doubles partner's name and the city they won the tournament in) is . Unfortunately my knowledge of Chinese sources is not great, so I have no idea if this article is any better than a routine match report. Everything else I found using her Chinese name (马烨欣 according to the source) is a passing mention at best. Iffy★Chat -- 14:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Iffy. Doesn't meet WP:NTENNIS or WP:GNG and all sources are passing mentions involving tennis results. Adamtt9 (talk) 23:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify. Player has just entered another W40 final, which shows her potential of winning more titles. If you still aren't quite sure about the article's notability (as per Iffy), please draftify it and bring it back in the future. More reliable sources can be added after it is draftified. Timothytyy (talk) 00:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * For everyone's information she just won a W40 again. Timothytyy (talk) 13:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep and also maybe  are probably enough for notability. Mucube (talk • contribs) 23:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 14:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. per sources provided by filelakeshoe. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 06:37, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify - This could be deleted but I agree the player shows a lot of potential. In a draft space it can be worked till "if/when" they meet Wikiproject Tennis guidelines. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The article already meets WP:GNG given the multiple reliable sources. Stopasianhate (talk) 01:24, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The RS have to each contain SIGCOV to count towards GNG. Merely being verifiable is irrelevant to notability. JoelleJay (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable player according to sources. Vecihi91 (talk) 18:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify. For a sportsperson bio to exist in mainspace in the first place it must meet GNG and cite at least one GNG source in the article. This has not been achieved for this subject. JoelleJay (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG given number of sources. Stopasianhate (talk) 01:24, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Stopasianhate, number of RS has zero bearing on GNG (outside of the requirement for "multiple"). Which sources provide SIGCOV of the subject? JoelleJay (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2023 (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.