Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicola Cerfontyne


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Nicola Cerfontyne

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

Has no final appearance at any bwf sanctioned senior tournament, nor is a very famous coach, but is a twice national champion. Fails WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. zoglophie 15:32, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Badminton,  and England. zoglophie 15:32, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:24, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * keep Notability (sports) She is twice gold medalist at English National Championships so meets notability under number 3. Quote = 3 Gold medalist at a national teams or singles/doubles championship, for countries that regularly send athletes to the Olympics.Racingmanager (talk) 16:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 23:09, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete. Ultimately it's the GNG that matters most in these sorts of discussions, as WP:NSPORTS itself makes clear. At minimum we need one source providing significant coverage (see proposal 5 from the 2022 RfC), and I'm not seeing that at the moment: after checking Google, ProQuest, the Wikipedia Library, etc., the best source I can find is this article in the local newspaper, which I think is too brief to count as sigcov; other sources are just passing mentions. Happy to reconsider if there's coverage I'm missing, but otherwise I don't think she's notable. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Final relist: none of the arguments here seem particularly illustrative. It would be more helpful if actual sources were linked by keep supporters, rather than being merely alluded to. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jp×g 01:12, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - over 60 matches in NewsBank from 2002 to 2017. Whilst most of these are routine coverage or passing mentions, and they are mainly from local publications, there are some additional biographical details mentioned in some of the articles. I think that cumulatively they provide enough evidence of notability and material to support an article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep per Racingmanager and BennyOnTheLoose Stvbastian (talk) 15:33, 17 December 2022 (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.