Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olamide Zaccheaus


 * 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. -- Scott Burley (talk) 02:58, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Olamide Zaccheaus

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Far WP:TOOSOON. Fails WP:GRIDIRON currently as they haven't played in regular or post season game and only just got drafted, which is obviously subject to a lot of change. Praxidicae (talk) 17:44, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:13, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:13, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete for now, per WP:NGRIDIRON. No notability from his college career or evidence of playing in the AAF. Obviously, the article could be recreated if he makes an NFL (or CFL) roster and plays in a regular-season game. —C.Fred (talk) 18:18, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete this is too soon for the article. Nothing against re-creating the page once he makes a roster. James-the-Charizard (talk) 18:48, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per C.Fred....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 19:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I am going to drop the question no one is asking.. Does editor work for the team? ScienceAdvisor (talk) 20:09, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * keep I don't work for the team, but a simple review of the news feed has given a good amount of specific, feature-length coverage of articles about his play at the college level. For example, Record-setting day for Olamide Zaccheaus propels Virginia to win over Ohio; Olamide Zaccheaus goes out with an MVP performance in Belk Bowl; and Jack of all trades: Virginia senior Olamide Zaccheaus expecting another heavy workload are just 3 articles with his name in the title way before the NFL draft, plus there are hundreds more articles where he is prominently featured in the story but just not "in the title" of the story.  Subject passes WP:GNG from news generated by his college play alone.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:43, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * hyper local college "coverage", hyperlocal, hyperlocal and I really question dailyprogress' editorial integrity. Praxidicae (talk) 20:49, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The Daily Progress is a member of the Virginia Press Association. I've never heard the term "hyperlocal" -- but MVP for the Belk Bowl does speak to WP:Impact and it was a nationally-covered post-season bowl game.  So that wouldn't be "local" at all.--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * See article The Daily Progress.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:32, 29 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete the articles mentioned are either game coverage at the amateur level or local coverage not satisfying WP:NCOLLATH, I think he will probably become notable soon though but the season isn't for another few months I think? SportingFlyer  T · C  17:38, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:NCOLLATH is inclusive and not exclusive, the sources provided and others not in the article surpass WP:GNG. There is more than one path to notability.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:09, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * As I've noted many times before, games coverage typically does not count towards WP:GNG in any sport. SportingFlyer  T · C  21:35, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Please do not confuse feature articles with basic sports stats and box scores or transactional data. Significant coverage such as feature articles about the athletes (and for that matter games) do apply toward notability.--Paul McDonald (talk) 22:26, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not. The wtkr.com article is about a game, not a feature article on the player. The two other articles are from the same publication, which is also local to the area the player plays in. SportingFlyer  T · C  04:34, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I believe you have. The article titled "Record-setting day for Olamide Zaccheaus propels Virginia to win over Ohio" actually mentions the subject in the title.  Further, there is nothing in WP:GNG that disqualifies local coverage (plus having a circulation over 20,000 puts The Daily Progress outside the range of a tiny little "local" paper).  There are enough other such articles to build a more thorough article over time just from the time period before this latest NFL draft.  That is way more than enough to meet the standard in WP:GNG of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".  And the subject wouldn't "lose" notability just for not making the cut of the NFL draft.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:28, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The article titled "Record-setting day for Olamide Zaccheaus" is four paragraphs long and mentions him only once outside of the headline. Hardly WP:SIGCOV. There's nothing wrong with local coverage per se, but we do tend to delete sports figures who only have local notability. Not to make an other stuff exists argument, but here is a deletion discussion I was on the wrong end of due to the delete !voters only mentioning the local coverage of the player, and unlike Zaccheaus that player had multiple feature articles written on him. SportingFlyer  T · C  07:54, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:SIGCOV: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. -- the  references in the article do indeed combine to meet that standard.  There is no original research here, the content of the article was garnered from the sources.  The standard is met.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Per C.Fred. Just WP:TOOSOON and fails WP:NGRIDIRON. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:57, 5 May 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.