Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcos Young (rugby union)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  14:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Marcos Young (rugby union)

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

Contested PROD, fails WP:NRU and WP:GNG. Creator has stated that he has played for a number of teams and added more sourcing, however none of this points to significant coverage of any sort. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Already PROD'd, not eligible for Soft Deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, United States of America,  and Washington, D.C.. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Let's draw a fair comparison. You have repeatedly nominated every single rugby article I have created for deletion twice now. You have claimed every single one suffers from a lack of significant coverage.
 * Let's take a look at some of the articles you've created, like Owen Watkin. As of now, Owen posesses a whopping 0 citations, and his 2 external links are to generic websites, much like a few of the sources I've used in creating these pages. Dmitri Arhip, another rugby article you wrote that has 1 citation, and 3 generic sources. What about him? Dillon Lewis? EytanMelech (talk) 19:00, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Granted, a lot of my early articles require significant improvement, but all of these were created at a time when notability guidelines were different, and all have significant coverage passing WP:GNG that can be found in even a simple search. On this subject, there is nothing to suggest in a WP:BEFORE that the subject passes WP:GNG. Please refrain from personal attacks please. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:11, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I don't seem to agree with you on that. Also, there are no personal attacks here, I am not insulting the quality of your work, nor am I attempting to state that your articles deserve to be deleted.
 * I did a 'simple search' for "Owen Watkin" rugby -wikipedia -wiki, and I see a very similar pattern among our articles.
 * 1. Sports databases (ESPN, all.rugby, rugbypass, eurosport).
 * 2. Trivial mentions (listings in general articles about team/team performance along with their position)
 * 3. Articles from teams that they have been included on.
 * 4. Signing statements.
 * If you think that Young, Sheehy, Bavaro, Daniel, Nelligan, Martinez, Newcomer, and the others all need to be deleted. That's' fine, that's your opinion, however, holding up to the notability standards of today, if the articles I created are to be deleted in 168 hours, I can think of a few others that definitely meet the same criteria that these do. EytanMelech (talk) 20:30, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @EytanMelech You are more than welcome to nominate articles for deletion if you do believe that the fail the notability guidelines but I would advise not to do such out of WP:REVENGE. Also please note that the current state of an article is generally not grounds for deletion so a proper WP:BEFORE is recommended. In the case of the above mentioned Owen Watkin, I easily found several significant sources on the subject and added them to the article. Alvaldi (talk) 10:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Argentina and Texas.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:40, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of WP:SIGCOV. The fact that the nominator has created articles that possibly fail GNG, has no relevance on this particular AfD. Alvaldi (talk) 09:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:17, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per my source analysis below Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:17, 29 June 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.