Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yolande Leacock


 * 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__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Yolande Leacock

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

Contested prod. I would argue fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:GNG. Articles exist but are routine coverage not extensive, and. Not sure if combined they could be argued to be enough. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 05:24, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Tennis,  and Trinidad and Tobago. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:23, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete, created by an abusive (now permablocked) user who created numerous other articles on non-notable tennis players. Guy (help! - typo?) 14:57, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep this is a low level but notably important player for Trinidad Tobago. She was just in the Trinidad news this October as the first player representing Trinidad Tobago in the Pan American Games. There is enough notability to keep. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:30, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The first part is not a valid reason to keep. One article is also not sufficient for GNG. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:42, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I would think a "notably important player for Trinidad Tobago" is quite a valid reason. It's why she has been in several articles about her in the Caribbean area. To each his own I guess on importance and we'll see what consensus thinks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: BLP, fails GNG and NBIO. WP:BLP states these articles need strong sourcing, 3 refs in article are a database record, an interview, and an unfound ref that fails V. BEFORE showed database records, nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV for a WP:BLP addressing the subject directly and indepth. Keep votes provide no sources to eval or guidelines, nothing more than ILIKEIT.  // Timothy :: talk  16:19, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Weak delete should be notable but I can't find long enough articles about her. is typical of what there is Oaktree b (talk) 16:37, 4 November 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.