Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manny Parra's perfect game


 * 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. Basically, not enough people have come forward to defend keeping the article, therefore consensus is to delete. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:12, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Manny Parra's perfect game

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG, lacking the multiple sources of independent, significant coverage typically expected. Even if you accept that Minor League Baseball's website (MiLB.com) is truly independent, most of the significant coverage I find is from that same publisher, which only counts as a single source for notability purposes per GNG. This single game also fails guideline WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE; there is only trivial mention after the initial news spike. Outside the routine game summary, the rest of the article is a WP:COATRACK for Parra's career, not the game itself. Yes, this has been approved as a Good Article, but initial discussions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball indicate this is worth a full discussion at AfD. —Bagumba (talk) 10:08, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. —Bagumba (talk) 10:14, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Yes, there is consensus here to delete. Given that the article is a GA, I would like that consensus be even firmer before pushing the button, to forestall any drama that might ensue. If another admin wishes to delete immediately, I will not stand in the way.
 * Keep I will never agree with deleting a well-written, useful article that is not clearly non-notable. The section on Parra's career after the perfect game should be shortened, but that's not sufficient reason for deletion. Lepricavark (talk) 15:41, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The WP:COATRACK was not a reason to delete. It was more to point out that most of the sources in the article are about his career, not the perfect game, which could WP:MASK the lack of notability if someone concentrates mainly on the number of existing citations.—Bagumba (talk) 16:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. A couple of thoughts here: 1.) The reason why we have these type of articles at the MLB level (Philip Humber's perfect game, Matt Cain's perfect game, etc.) is because these type of games are so rare, they instantly receive coast-to-coast national-level attention when they happen. I'm not sure that's necessarily true at the minor league level (as a matter of fact, the one source in the article to The Tennessean, Nashville's daily newspaper looks pretty underwhelming. The fact that this wasn't the front-page feature article of the local sports section, but was relegated to a small section in the corner underneath an article about the Atlanta Braves, would tend to speak against even the local importance of this). 2.) Going along with what was said, the "Parra's post-game career" section is too long, and most of the independent sources are supporting that section. Sources like this, this, and this look great, but they all have nothing to do with the perfect game. There's no question that Manny Parra is notable, what we're trying to do here is determine whether Manny Parra's perfect game is notable. As a matter of fact, I suppose a merge to Manny Parra could be one possible option for an outcome here. 3.) I'm not sure but that a better strategy here would have been trying to get this de-listed as a GA for an over-reliance on one source, then file an AfD on it afterwards. As seen above, some people may be loath to vote delete on a Wiki Good Article. This could be an interesting test case. 4.) Whatever outcome happens here should serve as a template for how to deal with John Wasdin's perfect game, a similar article about another minor league perfect game. Ejgreen77 (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * GA doesn't require notability Regarding your #3, suggesting a GA reassement, the GA criteria do not require notability. Per guideline Reviewing good articles: In particular, the GA criteria do not require compliance with several major guidelines, including Wikipedia:Notability ...—Bagumba (talk) 17:04, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Major League perfect games are notable, minor league ones aren't, as shown by the paucity of media coverage. Also delete John Wasdin's article and Tom Rogers' perfect game. A possible compromise would be to create a List of minor league perfect games and merge there. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * This game is currently listed at List of Nashville Sounds no-hitters and List of Pacific Coast League no-hitters, which should abate concerns to WP:PRESERVE (for now at least).—Bagumba (talk) 16:36, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete This event was not considered notable at the time it happened (See above comment by EJ concerning media coverage) and there is no proof that status has changed since....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:24, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Manny Parra, and merge any sourced material if needed. The player is notable, however this particular game of his is not, as demonstrated by the comments above.  169.232.162.112 (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 03:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. It is a shame good writing has to go to waste but sources make or break notability and this looks to just be noteworthy locally.White Siddiqah (talk) 23:29, 27 February 2019 (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.