This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sports. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sports|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sports. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Article created as WP:NPOVFACT violation to disparage a WP:BLP[1]. Looks multiple unconnected companies listed under the same umbrella tied together to create an elaborate WP:HOAX and many sections unrelated to company. For actual company, WP:RECENT focus on a single event from the 5 years back, see talk page for details. Previous points removed, I believe remaining actual subject of article does not meet WP:NOTABILITY criteria. Hence, recommend for deletion.Hibiscus192255 (talk) 01:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does look like article scope is bloated, then per WP:SBST, seems an otherwise minor organization that has received news coverage for only 1 event. Does not meet WP:NOTABILITY. The US website reference link provided seems like an unrelated organization. Wikilover3509 (talk) 03:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As mentioned on the talk page, this article lacks proper referencing. It cites several irrelevant sources that do not mention the company. The article talks about two different companies: one based in Nebraska, USA, and another in Dubai, but there is insufficient evidence linking either to Kalki Bhagwan, his son NKV Krishna, or daughter-in-law Preetha Krishna. Additionally, some sections of the article are unrelated to the company. Notably, all sources referring to the company are from 2019, and there is no relevant information available about the company beyond that period.Moonlight2006 (talk) 05:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Subject does not meet the WP:GNGorWP:NEVENT due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Most of the sources here originate from the participating schools and are primary, and a check didn't find much more than some routine game recaps with the event being only mentioned in passing, such as [[4]]. Appears to be just a routine regular season game. Let'srun (talk) 14:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep maybe turning it into a disambig. Firstly, it's different from Trojans or Spartans because phoenix club is a separate concept in sports. As a result, there is a significant amount of clubs named Phoenix in one of many spellings (Phoenix, Feniks, Fénix, Phönix), which at least creates a legitimate disambiguation. I don't mind converting it into a disambig but it is too long to be merged in an already huge main disambig Phoenix — NickK (talk) 07:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even know what to make of this. An indiscriminate and incomprehensible assemblage of statistics; many of the "sources" do not support what a particular table purports to show; appears to violate WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:SYNTHESIS, among other issues. Bgsu98(Talk)19:29, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Broc. The references are present to establish passage of NCORP and any concerns regarding promotional content can be addressed via editing. FrankAnchor15:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per WP:AVOIDCOI, making mention that I created the article. Additional information and sources added. Meets GNG's description of 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." Even when the article had one source, it sufficiently addressed the topic directly and in detail. Regardless, I have added more information to the article, as well as additional citations from additional secondary sources - all of which meet GNG's definition of significant coverage. I have also added an external link, on the article, to the press release report released by the founding schools when it was established - one of the cited sources also links to it. GuyBanks (talk) 03:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless the decision is made to delete all the other articles on individual Missouri high school conferences:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, I think we need to hear from more editors Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!04:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per WP:AUD local coverage such as the Ozarks First, Ozarks Sports Zone, and a local radio station (the three sources in the article currently) does not establish notability under WP:NORG for any of these sports leagues. Let'srun (talk) 21:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. - Although subject may meet WP:NGRIDIRON as stated in the last AfD (2011), this does not establish sufficient notability. C67906:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Do not comment on these articles here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, the remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.
(Discuss) – Ray Brown (Negro leagues pitcher) → Ray Brown (baseball) – Per WP:INCDAB a move discussion is necessary. INCDAB states: In individual cases consensus may determine that a parenthetically disambiguated title that is still ambiguous has a primary topic, but the threshold for identifying a primary topic for such titles is higher than for a title without parenthetical disambiguation. As with any other term with a primary topic, it should either be the title of the article for that topic or redirect to it. There are 2 Ray Brown baseball players, both pitchers: this one, a Hall of Fame Negro league pitcher; and Ray Brown (National League pitcher) who pitched 1 game for the Cubs in 1909. The pageviews (Negro league pitcher & Natinal League pitcher) over the last year are 3428:170, or ~20:1, which is about what it takes according to List of reported partially disambiguated article titles and their characteristics. I am arguing this Ray Brown is the primary baseball player topic (under WP:PT1) because it is highly likely [...] to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term. -- BX (talk) 00:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Subject does not meet the WP:GNGorWP:NEVENT due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Most of the sources here originate from the participating schools and are primary, and a check didn't find much more than some routine game recaps with the event being only mentioned in passing, such as [[12]]. Appears to be just a routine regular season game. Let'srun (talk) 14:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The page is a very short stub. While it does have a full table, there is nowhere near enough information on the page due to the lack of history and, presumably, lack of coverage on the construction and events at the venue. I actually considered constructing a Wikipedia article for The Coliseum back in November 2023, but I chose Halenbeck Hall instead due to the former's lack of resources. Centennial Center (Georgia College & State) would have certainly been a better choice for making a Wikipedia article. Wjenkins96 (talk)
Comment This page was created without the {{afd2}} tag and never transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now—I am neutral at this time. @Wjenkins96: For future nominations, please follow the instructions at WP:AFDHOWTO. Thanks. --Finngalltalk06:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now per WP:DONOTDEMOLISH. Nominator does not cite any policies, and it is a notable venue given its status as a Division I arena and as the region's premier concert and special events venue. This is the Wolves' first season in Division I; if it was deleted, it would be the only Division I arena not to have its own article. Let's leave it up for a bit to give other editors a chance to improve it and fix what's lacking. Tom Danson (talk) 17:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thank you for helping User:Wjenkins96 with this AFD, please follow all of the instructions to the letter next time. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!06:24, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – ground is widely covered by The Press with enough coverage elsewhere to meet WP:SIGCOV, the "No longer notable after the earthquakes" is an odd argument. --JP (Talk) 13:46, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jpeeling I agree with you that the "no longer notable after the earthquakes" argument is wrong, provided there was notability to begin with, But to the extent the Press articles offer WP:SIGCOV of any facility, they seem to highlight Queen Elizabeth II Park, not the Village Green venue in particular. Do you have sources that show specific coverage of the Village Green versus the broader complex it was part of? Open to switching my !vote but I need to see some SIGCOV of the specific venue rather than the complex it was part of. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another non-notable T10 league, this time from the Cayman Islands. Fails WP:NCRIC and WP:GNG, alongside WP:EVENT. Notability of an event also isn't inherited just because current or former players are taking part. AA (talk) 23:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Routine squad announcements? Zero in-depth coverage which demonstrates why this tournament is notable. It is being played in the Cayman Islands, one of the lowest ranked associate members of the ICC. Zero notability and would be surprised if A) it happens, B) it lasts more than a season. The list of notable cricket tournaments can be found here. You won't it on this list. AA (talk) 12:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete i think it doesn't have enough reliable sources to prove it's notable. Most references are not independent or detailed enough to show it's important. Yakov-kobi (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although subject may be covered by WP:NCRICKET(Additionally, cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level [...] may have sufficient coverage about them to justify an article, but it should not be assumed to exist without further proof), with a single appearance for a club side more than 20 years ago, there is no indication the subject has received significant coverage to pass the general notability guideline. C67910:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - either one article is the problem or thousands. And if we isolate individual articles - in both English and non-English speaking countries - this does nothing to solve the problem we've landed ourselves in. Bobo.17:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
So what exactly makes this guy notable? Being the son of Michael Vaughan, is all I can tell. He hasn't played cricket at a senior level and hasn't done anything of note in cricket to warrant inclusion. No amount of WP:ROUTINE refbombs can hide that he is a WP:GNG fail. AA (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don’t understand whether he has already played for Somerset and the England U19 to pass WP:NCRIC, but signing a contract with the club and being called up to the U19 team is being covered in the media, which indicates the passage WP:SIGCOV. I will list several secondary sources, you can easily find more [14][15][16]Tau Corvi (talk) 14:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But why is that notable? Plenty of people get signed by major sports teams and never go onto do anything. Is the bar really set this low? Again, if his father wasn't a famous cricketer, he would not get any coverage. AA (talk) 22:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article was moved to mainspace via Afc. Subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Hildreth gazzard (talk) 00:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Widespread coverage in established media including BBC, Sky Sports, The Times, The Daily Telegraph The Independent, ESPNCricinfo etc. Yes the articles often mention his father in the headline or the article themselves but that is going to be the case his entire life unless he manages to totally surpass what his father achieved which is a high bar to set. The articles themselves are about him, not his father, and as such he easily passes the coverage test. Shrug02 (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
This AfD might be exactly the same issue as with Peter Kondrát I nominated back in January under my old username (CuteDolphin712). Since Martin Liška was born in Brno, Czech Republic, but represents Slovakia, I don't know which language of source is primary.
The only decent site I found in Slovak language is SME but it looks nowhere near significant.
Oddly enough, Czech media IDNES (2016, 2018, 2022) and Czech Television have articles of a horseback rider of the same name. However, the first source by IDNES tells said jockey turned 39 thus clearly not the same men as this cyclist. Without evidence of cyclist Liška being a horse jockey in his hometown, this case fails WP:V.
Delete: Brief ESPN bio [18] and routine transfer mentions [19], neither of which are useful for notability here. Sourcing in the article is of the same quality, non-helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 21:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Google search on the name brought back nothing other than database sources. Soccerway link on the page with the corresponding DoB confirms he played one season in the Portuguese third tier in 2013-14. C67911:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This Slovak men's footballer played in his country from 2013 until 2016 before moving to lower leagues in the Czech Republic and Poland. Secondary sources analysis from my searches through translation:
Žilinský Večerník is a blogspot containing an interview with just secondary content in the opening paragraph.
SME seems to be a decent source mentioning Klec scoring a hat-trick.
Dnes24 is a transfer announcement of him moving to Třinec on loan.
Dziennik Polski is another transfer announcement to Puszcza Niepołomice.
In my opinion, none of those sources above actually approach WP:SIGCOV that are required for encyclopedia. I have checked corresponding articles on him in other Wikipedia languages, but all of them likewise provide match reports, primary sources, and database.
⋆｡˚꒰ঌClara A. Djalim໒꒱˚｡⋆13:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. I've only found one secondary source that talks directly about him [20]. I think this is not enough to confirm the significance. The source Geschichte cites is an interview, that is, a primary source. Tau Corvi (talk) 19:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Geschichte. The source contains enough independent commentary on the subject to qualify as significant coverage. The source found by Tau Corvi is significant as well. A FIFA World Cup player is virtually certain to pass GNG, and its worth noting that we do not have access to 1990s Czechslovak newspapers. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Geschichte's source is an interview with Kinier where the only independent info is clubs/countries he played for and not playing in the 1984 Olympics. Tau Corvi's source is better but they aren't enough for a GNG pass. https://kramerius5.nkp.cz/ has Czech newspapers and https://dikda.snk.sk/ Slovak newspapers. His 260 top flight appearances are irrelevant. Dougal18 (talk) 09:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His 260 top flight appearances are irrelevant. – Common. sense. For modern European players (I'm talking internet era), where we have full-access to sources, can you find anyone with 260 top-flight appearances who is non-notable? Can you find a single modern European FIFA World Cup player for which there is no sigcov? Why would the 1980s be any different? Tau Corvi's source satisfies WP:SPORTCRIT, which should be all that is needed to allow this to be kept given the subject. (As for the links you provide, I've never seen those websites before. How in-depth are their 1980s newspaper collections?) BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, Dougal18 and Tau Corvi are correct. WP:SPORTSBASIC #5 states: Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. The source given by Tau Corvi looks like SIGCOV thing, but GNG requires multiple in-depth coverage as possible overall instead of just one. Even if the paywalled Sme newspaper contains SIGCOV, that is still not equivalent to GNG. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌClara A. Djalim໒꒱˚｡⋆14:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Kinier is still a local football legend in Žilina but as he played in communist Czechoslovakia online coverage of his career is not the best. However, there is in fact a full page coverage (not an interview) published by the Štart magazine in 1985. The magazine does not exist anymore, but the issue can be accessed by registered users through the digital repository of the Slovak National Library. Happy to improve the article further when/if I find more sources. Newklear007 (talk) 12:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG (which says that these must meet GNG) Of the sources, 2 are just database listings and the other is about a game where he is mentioned. North8000 (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the only remotely RS I can find are brief mentions of him in reports of matches. It sounds like he might become notable as his career progresses, but right now is TOOSOON. StartGrammarTime (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draft According to soccerway he hasn't played any games. So those trophies? Are they really earned? If the article was improved with better sourcing I might send to draft, in it's current state I would delete. Also @ Mohamedmokhtar22 Why do you have two accounts? Govvy (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I didn't find any articles about him in RS, only statistics and news on the website of the club for which he plays. Tau Corvi (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Previously deleted by PROD. C67903:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 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.
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 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.
Link 3 Turkmen news agency which is also Independent from CAFA
Link 4 Sport.kg an Information Agency; Sport.kg is the only specialized portal in Kyrgyzstan
and many more; that i will add to the article to enhance it sourcing
2. The tournament is organized by the Central Asian Football Association (CAFA), which oversees football in Central Asia. CAFA is a member of the AFC and, therefore, FIFA. As an international competition between member nations, the tournament holds significant notability. This is particularly relevant now, as some footballers who participated in the tournament are becoming prominent figures in Central Asian football and across Asia. The tournament shall be cited as the beginning of their international careers, further emphasizing its importance. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 09:31, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment International level competition and there are sources, however they are very young. So I am not sure at what level wikipedia should be keeping these. Govvy (talk) 10:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep
let us remember that The Central Asian Football Association (CAFA) was only formed in 2015, and with the tournament being the 8th tournament organised, CAFA has shown significant progress in promoting and developing football in the region. Over the years, CAFA has developed its media coverage and reporting capabilities, making the tournaments more accessible and notable. While the first editions may have had limited coverage due to CAFA's emerging stage and limited experience, the organization's growth and increased attention highlight the importance of these early stages articles being there.
Furthermore, for Central Asia, where international sports events are relatively scarce, CAFA's tournaments hold notable significance. The early editions of the tournament are crucial for understanding the development of football in the region and providing a better statistical context. As CAFA continues to grow and attract more attention, the historical records of all editions, including the first ones, will be valuable for researchers, fans, and anyone interested in the football in Central Asia.
Therefore, despite its relatively young age, CAFA's tournaments are notable and deserving of coverage on Wikipedia, as they contribute to the broader narrative of international sports in Central Asia. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 19:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: We have arguments to Keep, Delete and Redirect right now. Let's get a few more sports fans in here. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!21:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Redirecting it would diminish the significance of the tournament compared to other international competitions. This is an Under-16 level event organized by all confederations; the article should remain. Similar to UEFA and AFC tournament editions before the 2000s, the early editions of the CAFA tournament need to be preserved.
As a friendly tournament, the matches were of no consequence. Thus, 10 years later, we can clearly see that the tournament was not noteworthy, wasn't important in the world of football and got a corresponding lack of coverage (apart from reports of the matches). The level of detailed coverage on display (goalscorers, match kick-off times, table) is therefore not needed, with the entry failing WP:NOTINHERITED (notability not being inherited from the participating teams), WP:MILL, WP:SUSTAINED and WP:NOTSTATS among others. Geschichte (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – It is self-evident that a friendly tournament will not change the course of football history, but the record of a competition that brought together four top-tier clubs in Europe does not seem impertinent to me, and the records of the matches and other relevant information are all available for verification. As there were no more editions to stabilize the competition, as occurred with the Audi Cup, I understand the nomination, but I do not see sufficient reason to eliminate the article. Svartner (talk) 08:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and part mergeto2014–15 FC Schalke 04 season, there is a bizarre notion that pre-seasons have no bering on club seasons, well they can, from injuries to key players, a club debut for another player. I don't see a need for this AfD at this level. There is a scattering effect of information and then there is no information. How in-depth to you want an article to be. It could easily be kept with good coverage. But I don't see the point here. Clearly no thought to a redirect or adding certain information to the other club season articles. Govvy (talk) 20:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Opinion is divided here. Looking for more participation to determine consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!20:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is only one source listed in the article, and I couldn’t find any others. If you manage to do this, please ping me. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I per nom, above. I couldn't find a sinlge article even mentioning her via a Newsbank database search. Fails GNG. Cabrils (talk) 00:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
Per an IP at WP:BLP/N, this article is "a complete PR/puff page with self-published sources, press releases, purchased awards, and myriad other issues. I looked up a bunch of policies to help clean it up but in the end I don't know what to do about it, given it's still just a complete mess, the entire title is fake, and is maintained by an SPA."
It isn't a page based on self-published sources, there are several independent sources including official government pages (Albania and Lebanon) and you can't purchase a Kentucky Colonelship.
I have used his self published books as a reference only to the books name, not to any relevant information about the person himself.
The claim on notability is based on several important sources mentioning him, including the Government of Lebanon, Albania,the Armenian orthodox church, the city of Petrópolis in Brazil, the Global Imams Council and so on
If his titles are fake is not the point of this article, there is even a source saying that he is a fake prince and a fake martial artist
I am the creator of the page, I'm just not logged in.
The list ONLY has 1,000 colonels, absence in the list doesn't mean anything!
"The Kentucky Colonel List and List of Kentucky Colonels (same list with two names) is meant to provide website users with a diverse permanent listing of up to 1,000 Kentucky colonels from all walks of life for our book, 100 of those people will be highlighted with a single paragraph. The Kentucky Colonel List project does not replace the International Kentucky Colonel Registry (a planned program that was delayed in 2020 coincident with the pandemic) which was merged into an International Goodwill Ambassador Registry, with colonels listed for the Commonwealth of Kentucky. " Kentucky Colonel: Official History & Legacy of the Kentucky Colonelcy - List of Kentucky ColonelsMasterKamalKhan (talk) 21:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to include the claim please provide a reliable source that is not self-published.
On second glance it says "The complete list of persons that have received the Kentucky Colonel Commission is lengthly to say the least; there are over 350,000 people that have received a Kentucky Colonel Commission from one of 55 of its 59 governors that have served the state since 1792" - I don't think being a Kentucky Colonel is something that should be in the article anyway. It's almost like adding that you were Time Person of the Year 2006. D1551D3N7 (talk) 22:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. The sources cited are utterly worthless as evidence for the existence of this title, never mind this individual's claim to it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But I didn't say it is evidence of his titles, but it is evidence of notability, being received officially by the President of Albania and the President of Lebanon is very much note worthy. As I said, this article is not debating if his titles are real or not, I even used one source that says his titles are fake. Leo0274 (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that there are numerous third-party sources from Lebanon and Jordan, as well as the Vatican, that recognize the Ghassanid history and royal house. The House is currently under review by the ICOC, which does recognize the House as Royal and is evaluating the awards. The Augustan Society has recognized the house and orders and history. The Marionite Church recognizes the House and history, as well as the current Arab Christian princes. Arbitration courts have rules the claim in valid and under international law is to be recognized. Comments so far show more ignorance than knowledge, and should not be the basis for deleting. There are sufficient third party sources to meet the Wikipedia requirements. Xianboyd (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He was featured by his title on news vehicles of Brazil, Lebanon, UAE, UK, Italy, Spain, Germany, USA, Israel, Jordan, Canada, Iraq, etc. If that's not notability, I don't know what it is! MasterKamalKhan (talk) 17:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the claim that the 'Prince' is recognised by the UN is complete fiction, for multiple obvious reasons starting with the fact that the UN doesn't involve itself in determinations of the legitimacy of hereditary titles, I think we can discount the Jerusalem Post piece as the regurgitated press release it appears to be. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sir, with all due respect, regardless of the UN recognition the article mentions the recognition by the Global Imams Council, the world's largest body of Muslim leaders. That alone is reason for notability. MasterKamalKhan (talk) 19:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there was any credible evidence that this 'Global Imams Council' actually was 'the world's largest body of Muslim leaders', that argument might just possibly be worth considering. As it stands, I can find nothing whatsoever which supports such a claim. The 'Council' seems to be almost entirely unnoticed. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're obviously pro-Israel. But you cannot completely disqualify a news outlet because one wrong thing was found against it. If that's the case, all major newspapers would be disqualified. And again, there are two sources confirming the stated. MasterKamalKhan (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the wikipedia article there was absolutely zero mention of a recognition by the UN, again, the wikipedia article is not about Gharios' claims to any titles, it is about the man himself. A section about a controversy on his claims is welcome to stay published, just find notable and reliable sources of this controversy.
You can't disqualify the Jerusalem Post, the Albanian and the Lebanese Governments, the Global Imams Council and others as not notable sources. And, if Gharios is a fake, that makes him even more notable for having fooled presidents Leo0274 (talk) 22:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If Anna Anderson can have a wikipedia page why can't Prince Ghassan? Granted Anna has more citations but her grift was at a much higher level than any alleged grift by Prince Ghassan so it stands to reason that would be the case. Over the years I've come to the conclusion that wikipedia may have their heart in the right place, but they are very arbitrary when it comes to what is or what is not fact. There have been a number of instances where I have tried to correct outright falsehoods published as fact in Wikipedia based on my insider knowledge of the events in question only to have my edits rejected because the alternative "facts" were deemed of higher value...see my roll tape tony edit. It's ok to have arbitrary standards, after all you are the community who builds and maintains wikipedia, but it's my opinion that this is just another case of wikipedia taking itself way too seriously. The fact that a relatively unknown Prince has come under such a coordinated attack advocating the deletion of this article should tell you there's something going on and you are being played. Having said all that, the actual content of the article can only be improved (which it would benefit from) to meet wikipedia standards if it is not deleted. ~~toolroom~~
Delete per nomination. The subject seems to be a grifter attempting to portray themselves as some kind of VIP but there is little substance behind it when one digs deeper. D1551D3N7 (talk) 17:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Collapse long list of links and claims of notability from MasterKamalKhan
::I used as a source a link from the presidential site of Albania about the official meeting with the president, and this article addresses Gharios as a Prince, the President also sent him a letter addressing him as Royal Highness, I tryed to link the web archive on the source, it is number source number 20, but it seems like it didn't work. Here is the link to the letter: https://royalblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/img_9887.jpg?w=728
There is also the presidential decree on Lebanon authorizing the Royal House to operate in the country, you may arguee that this is not a recognition of his titles, but it is evidence of notability. The page has been edited to remove the decree and other sources that I originally posted from the Lebanese Government, here are some of them:
You would do well to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. We do not cite random blogs. We do not cite pdfs hosted on random websites. And we don't cite anything that merely repeats the title a man has given himself as evidence that he is a legitimate holder of that title. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the Wikipedia has authority to determine if a title is real or not. We are discussing notability and here you will find more than enough independent third-party news outlets, official websites of Bonafide entities, political and religious leaders that recognize him and clearly consider him notable enough to officially acknowledge his existence.
According to the cited Wikipedia:Reliable sources:
"News sources often contain both factual content and opinion content. News reporting from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact.."
"Otherwise reliable news sources—for example, the website of a major news organization—that publish in a blog-style format for some or all of their content may be as reliable as if published in standard news article format (See also Wikipedia:Verifiability § Newspaper and magazine blogs)."
You are correct, wikipedia does not judge notability based on what a person is or isn't, tiles or otherwise. We need articles about the person, not simply having their name mentioned in articles about other things... You've failed to give one article that is about this person in a reliable source, only having name drops in various things. Oaktree b (talk) 00:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sir, with all due respect, I'm posting the individual news outlets and official websites so they can be addressed individually. I apologize if looks like I'm "bombarding" the discussion. MasterKamalKhan (talk) 19:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MasterKamalKhan read Wikipedia:Don't bludgeon the process. You are doing yourself no favours by spamming this discussion with unformatted URLS and bold-face text. If the subject is notable, this can be demonstrated through a few (probably no more than three) high-reputation independent reliable sources discussing the Prince. Not interviews with him (we attach little significance to interviews with regards to establishing notability), not articles about him meeting some dignitary or other but articles discussing him, in depth. Article in credible sources, not websites that appear to publish flattery for a fee. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sir, I've presented 14 (fourteen) news sources that are considered valid sources by Wikipedia. Just refer to them and you'll see their Wikipedia pages. I'm very sorry but your position disqualifying all the sources without presenting any valid arguments is absurd! Obviously, if he got awards (you have to prove that they were paid, since there's not even a single suspicion published anywhere) like the Honorary citizenship of Petropolis, or the International Sports Hall of Fame! You are literally accusing Evader Holyfield, Jason Statham and Royce Gracie of paying for the award??? Obviously, if he's officially meeting with heads of State and Religion being recognized by his titles, he's notable! Can anyone easily meet those dignitaries? MasterKamalKhan (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are valid, but they only mention him in passing, we need article about this person, not simple portals, photos or church websites. Oaktree b (talk) 00:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I used as a source a link from the presidential site of Albania about the official meeting with the president, and this article addresses Gharios as a Prince, the President also sent him a letter addressing him as Royal Highness, I tryed to link the web archive on the source, it is number source number 20, but it seems like it didn't work. Here is the link to the letter
There is also the presidential decree on Lebanon authorizing the Royal House to operate in the country, you may arguee that this is not a recognition of his titles, but it is evidence of notability. The page has been edited to remove the decree and other sources that I originally posted from the Lebanese Government
You can argue that none of that proves his titles are real, but you can't say it is not notable. The article is not about Gharios being Prince of Ghassan, the article is about the mand himself, add a section mentioning the controversy on his royal claims (if there is enough notable evidence of this controversy) Leo0274 (talk) 20:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personal communications cannot be cited on Wikipedia, we require published sources. Even if it could be verified (it can't), a letter from the President of Albania would be of no relevance to this discussion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, being officially received by the President of Albania and having the meeting oficially publish in the Presidency website is not notable enough? We need to stablish objective parameters for what notability means. A presidential decree on Lebanon (or any other country) is quite notable. The Official website of the Armenian Orthodox Church seem pretty notable. Leo0274 (talk) 21:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are numerous reliable and independent sources demonstrating Prince Gharios's notability. The main criticism seems to be "it sounds fake" without any evidence that such is the case. Unless the reputable sources can be shown to be falsified, I agree for keeping the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14D:4C84:1724:8060:7BCB:2538:C39D (talk) 21:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are not discussing the validity of his titles or claims, but I presented several inarguably notable sources about him. You are just ignoring it. And if his titles are fake and he is a con artist, that makes him even more notable Leo0274 (talk) 22:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I was trying to say, mere mention of the name and title (I did not argue about the validity of the title) is not equivalent to significant coverage. He is mentioned, but not covered significantly. Prof.PMarini (talk) 23:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DO NOT DELETE! Prince Gharios is an internationally respected personality, receiving honours from several nations, the Holy See and the United Nations. He is received in audience by presidents, kings, high nobility, patriarchs and the Pope. Notable scholars confirmed the validity of his claim and titles. He is using his orders of chivalry not for personal purposes, but to raise funds for charities, supporting refugees and persecuted Christians in the Middle East. The Royal House of Ghassan is accredited to the U.N. ECOSOC and the Government of Lebanon, where his family is considered as princely and one of the most noble of this nation. Listen to the facts and the experts and not to some wannabe-debunkers and their fake-news! 2A02:8071:5330:78A0:8BE:3587:6509:FE (talk) 22:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that "The Royal House of Ghassan" is accredited by UN ECOSOC is completely bogus. The letter is in the JabalnaMagazine source given elsewhere in the discussion. It clearly states that the organization "Sovereign Imperial and Royal House of Ghassan Inc" has been given consulatative status whatever that means. This doesn't mean accredation or even recognition, it's just that Mr Gharios has registered a company with that name, hence the "Inc" at the end. D1551D3N7 (talk) 23:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The page should not be deleted because it is true and legitimate. There are many people out there who may not like Prince Gharios and are doing all their best to have the page deleted. I vote that the page is real and should not be tampered with. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelly Fawaz (talk • contribs) 21:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given that you claim on your user page to have been "Knighted by Prince Gharios", [27] I suspect we'd be best advised take your comments with a pinch of salt... AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You would do well to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia policy instead. AfD discussions are not votes, and they aren't settled through endorsements from accounts created especially to participate. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've also said this before: the wikipedia article is not about Gharios' claims to any titles, it is about the man himself. A section about a controversy on his claims is welcome to stay published, just find notable and reliable sources of this controversy.
You can't disqualify the Jerusalem Post, the Albanian and the Lebanese Governments, the Global Imams Council and others as not notable sources. And, if Gharios is a fake, that makes him even more notable for having fooled presidents Leo0274 (talk) 23:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Can't find any RS backing up notability. Seems to be a concerted campaign both before this AfD and during it (socks and SPAs) to get this person an article. DeCausa (talk) 22:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said before: So, being officially received by the President of Albania and having the meeting oficially publish in the Presidency website is not notable enough? We need to stablish objective parameters for what notability means. A presidential decree on Lebanon (or any other country) is quite notable. The Official website of the Armenian Orthodox Church seem pretty notable. Leo0274 (talk) 23:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not. Read GNG. Millions of people are "officially received" by presidents or are subjects of presidential decrees. They count for nothing unless independent secondary sources are discussing those meetings in depth. Anything published by the government about these governmental activities is obviously not independent. Same goes for any other org, like the Armenian Orthodox Church, that has interacted in any way with the subject: not independent = what they say is worthless for notability. JoelleJay (talk) 23:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: User:Leo0274 has an undeclared COI with the subject of this discussion. On this Reddit thread(archive) they state "Me and the Prince are coproducing a YouTube channel and online classes about monarchy, and I'm his secretary. The knighthood is for these services and for my efforts on the monarchist movement" D1551D3N7 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
*::Honestly NONE here is even reading the sources provided. I sincerely don't know why wasting everyone's time PRETENDING that there's a debate. You're just, nihilistically denying sources that are valid by Wikipedia itself. But clearly you made up your minds so go ahead and delete the page, but please don't pretend that this is an honest procedure sine you don't even read the articles provided or you'd have, at least, pretending you check anything. It's really sad... MasterKamalKhan (talk) 00:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not as sad as writing your own Wikipedia page or trying to revive some kind of link to a royal family that hasn't existed in 1400 years and then making not one but THREE "Equestrian Orders" and giving yourself the title of "Grand-Master" 😂 D1551D3N7 (talk) 00:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why I am Reverend Dr. D1551D3N7 Phd MISSP MBA MS MA of the House Baratheon First of His Name, King of the Andals and the First Men and Lord of the Seven Kingdoms. Colonel of Kentucky. Time Person of the Year 2006. Grand Master of the Royal Imperial Equestrian Order of Dinglebats. Lord of the Manor Pennythorne Scotland.
What is really sad are single-purpose accounts barging in with no notion of Wikipedia's notability and civility standards, and no interest in learning them. Once you actually read those standards, we can go from there. The main one here you seem either not to understand or purposefully ignoring is WP:GNG, which holds that a subject is notable if they have received "significant coverage" in multiple independent, third party sources with a reputation for fact checking and reliability. Ravenswing 00:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that simply by "wishful thinking" you seem to discredit sources that are perfectly valid to other Wikipedia pages. None of you are even reading the sources! It's really shameful! Again, go ahead and delete it and don't waste anyone's time pretending to be honest and unbiased! MasterKamalKhan (talk) 00:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously people ARE scoping out the sources, one analysis in detail below. What is really shameful is your apparent inability to imagine that anyone could approach this issue honestly and without bias. Ravenswing 08:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do not have multiple sources that are each reliable, independent, secondary, and in-depth.
1. JPost is a one-sentence trivial passing mention and almost certainly just parroting a self-description anyway N. 2. Muslim Journal is another trivial passing mention regurgitating Masjid Muhammad's (primary, non-independent) description of his visit, written by an employee of Masjid Muhammad N. 3. Zenit does have some secondary background info on the subject, but is predominantly interview-based and thus primary and non-independent. 4. Al-Arab has a lot of details on Ghassanids but nothing more than a single sentence on Gharios; obviously content from Gharios himself is not secondary or independent N. 5. Actuall is a pure Q&A interview; see previous N. 6. An Nahar has a trivial passing mention of Gharios N. 7. Gentleman's Review is another Q&A interview N. 8. Tribuna is a simple namedrop N. 9. Idea isn't accessible but looks to be simply stating what Gharios said at a conference rather than anything about him. 10-13. The official websites of orgs that received, recognized, awarded, or otherwise interacted with Gharios are not independent sources N.
A reminder that a source can be perfectly valid to use on Wikipedia but not acceptable to use for establishing notability. JoelleJay (talk) 00:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, most people here aren't going to dig through 15 different sources. I suggest you point out WP:THREE solid sources that you think best demonstrate notability, so the sourcing can be judged on quality rather than quantity. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:53, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Pretender to a 1000 yr old defunct kingdom, is a new one at AfD. This is vanity spam, the individual is in no way notable. Sourcing is largely in un-RS as explained. We have confirmation of existence, but not notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Gnews shows two press releases, Gsearch is straight to his website, then social media, then an astrology website. This wikipedia article appears to be used as PROMO, to help get higher Gsearch rankings. I'd have tagged this A7 or G11 or... multiple criteria for non-notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per JoellJay's source analysis, none of the sources presented so far establish notability. I did my own search and did not find any significant coverage of this person, only social media and the occasional passing mention. CodeTalker (talk) 02:14, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While I appreciate the vigorous attempt at nonsense, it's still nonsense. Chaotic Enby's analysis of the sources has not been refuted in any meaningful way, so this is an easy delete for dubious notability. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable pretender to a throne that has not existed for nearly 1400 years. JoelleJay has done an excellent job of analyzing the weakness of the references. Repetitive TLDR screeds cannot create notability out of thin air. Cullen328 (talk) 07:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Quite aside from this being a total failure of the GNG to anyone with the nous to look at the sources, this is a failure of WP:BULLSHIT as well; hanging the notability off of a charlatan's self-awarded pretence to a long-defunct "throne" is nonsense. Gosh, I just declared myself Byzantine Emperor, because, well ... I just am, alright? Ravenswing 08:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article seems to have started out as draft created by 110347nbtough in November 2020, who subsequently seemed to claim they were Bunasawa himself over on Wikimedia Commons here and here. The draft was then approved by DN27ND about a month later, even though the DN27ND account was only four days old and seems to have no experience as an WP:AFC reviewer. Moreover, DN27ND is an WP:SPA whose primary focus on English Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and Japanese Wikipedia has been creating/editing content about Bunasawa; in other words, it seems that the account was specifically and only created for that purpose.
I wasn't sure about the subject's Wikipedia notablity per WP:BIO and asked about the article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts#Nori Bunasawa. DN27ND was pinged into the discussion but never responded. It was then suggested on my user talk page that the article be nominated for deletion. I tried some more WP:BEFORE but found nothing resembling significant coverage. I also tried looking at the Japanese Wikipedia article ja:樗沢憲昭 and the Egyptian Arabic Wikiepdia article arz:نورى_بوناساوا but found nothing resembling significant coverage being cited in either of them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Potential COI issues aside, the subject evidently seems to be a notable coach at Olympic and World Championship level, and for US colleges. Other pursuits as a magazine publisher/author and film consultant (?) would probably not rise to notability themselves, but the coverage for all three careers being mostly in 50+ year old newspapers – paired with the subject being otherwise covered by not only non-English, but non-Latin-alphabet, media – would be the AGF reason for fewer substantial sources (which is satisfactory here). The article could do with some clean-up, but from a glancing view I would also say it is not short on sources for its coverage, and that the coverage generally indicates notability. Kingsif (talk) 13:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no conflict of interest. I'm not getting paid by Bunasawa. In order to get leads on sources and information, we do have a working relationship (as a reporter would on their subject) where I could reach out and obtain information. I do have drafts of other judokas in the works but am working on securing their contact information in order to get additional leads to sources and information.
There are multiple sources online in various languages (English, Japanese, Russian, etc.) which indicates notability.
Bunasawa's involvement as a leader of judo in the USA
Bunasawa is notable for his involvement in the sport of judo and for his involvement in the movie industry.
There are no COI issues and I sent him a draft on the article as a courtesy, in order to have a working relationship with him for leads on additional sources and for information regarding judo sports figures of which there will be wiki articles published in the future. DN27ND (talk) 05:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also advised Bunasawa and his newspaper/magazine publishing team to create a wikipedia account in order for them to release some of the photos that they own to wikimedia commons. DN27ND (talk) 05:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I received information that Nori Bunasawa and his newspaper/magazine publishing company owns the photos that he uploaded and that were deleted off of wikimedia commons. DN27ND (talk) 06:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being paid is not the only criterion for conflict of interest. See WP:EXTERNALREL. I think the fact that you have a working relationship with this person and especially that you showed the subject of the article a draft itself (presumably for feedback, considering you asked for leads on missing info) is concerning.
The tone in the article has issues with WP:WTW; "dream team", "talented group", "further his education" are unencyclopedic and lean towards WP:PUFFERY.
Whether or not there actually is a COI is debatable, but even the scent of one can ruin your credibility on Wikipedia. You really should be more cautious in future. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 09:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"dream team" is a common phrase that was originally used to describe the 1992 Basketball Olympic team which swept the competition, and then has been adapted by culture to apply to various sports and teams to mean a team that has won by a large margin over opponents. Given the context and the results of the 1969 World Judo Championships in Mexico city, (this only happed twice in the history of the sport) this is an appropriate phrase to use to describe the events.
The phrase is also used in other wikipedia articles
Would it be puffery to describe the 1992 US Olympic dream team as "talented"? Or would it be appropriate to describe any other sports team as talented on wikipedia?
"The team assembled by USA Basketball for the tournament in Barcelona in 1992 was one of the most illustrious collections of talent assembled in the history of international sport"
"USA Basketball officials sought to construct the team dubbed Dream Team III (Dream Team II was the moniker of the lesser-known 1994 FIBA World Championship team) with a winning combination of veteran players from the 1992 Dream Team that won the gold medal in Barcelona and some of the league's best young talent."
"When the first ten players of the 1996 United States Men's national basketball team roster were announced in the summer of 1995, that young talent, and first-time Olympians, included the likes of Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill, Shaquille O'Neal, and Gary Payton"
Regarding the phrase "further his education", there are sources that Bunasawa attended these universities after receiving a bachelors degree. If that isn't further one's education, then what is?
Are you saying that journalists never show their subjects a draft to ensure the correct sequence of events?
We're not journalists. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. We're actually allowed to describe people as talented, but not in Wikipedia's voice per WP:NPOV. You have to attribute those kinds of opinions to notable people, like "journalist x described y as talented". 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also "Dream Team" I can concede on, but other flowery wordings I'm relatively confident in. When you're already bordering on having a COI, you should be paranoid about writing stuff that borders on excessively flattering or flowery, but you're not doing adequate due diligence. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:29, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The selection of the word "talent" in that context was to summarize the accomplishments of those selected to be on the 1969 Japan World Judo team and in that particular year. How else would you summarize a collection of people that had multiple world titles, and had multiple Olympic gold medals? In retrospect, even most of the alternatives selected as backups went on to win world titles in subsequent championships. To choose the "talented" word, is this not appropriate considering the results that these players had?
Considering the results of sporting competitions, is it "flowery" to describe Lebron James, Michael Jordan, Tom Brady, Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson, etc., as talented without having to say "journalist x described y as talented".?These sporting figures have won multiple world and Olympic titles in their respective sport.
At the end of the day, we are not journalist but the human aspect still applies. Courtesy and respect towards one's subject goes a long way. Just because a writer chooses to show courtesy and respect towards the subject he is writing about, it doesn't mean there is a COI.
If a person chooses to take more college courses after achieving a Bachelor's degree, how would you describe that if not "furthering his education" ? There is newspaper evidence that Bunasawa was taking more university level courses while simultaneously coaching the varsity judo team.
There is also no "personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial" COI. It is common in journalism to keep good relationships (ie protection of anonymity of whistleblowers) with one's subjects/sources in order to further obtain information from them. There is precedence (especially in sports) of subjects denying access of information to journalists who may be rude, disrespectful, etc. Some of the information taken from newspaper sources, sports media sources (ie ESPN) require journalists to be able to contact sports figures for information. DN27ND (talk) 11:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We are not journalists. The info on wikipedia articles are not primary sources (birth certificates, actual signed contracts, actual college diplomas, identity cards, actual competition brackets etc). These are citations to newspapers and magazines, which are written by sports journalists or reporters. These are secondary and tertiary sources.
If wikipedia contributors are able to use primary sources, it would make writing these articles easier and actually more accurate (since I could just upload the proof)
Even though we are not journalist, having courtesy and respect towards one's subject could yield leads to information which would make summarizing events easier and more accurate. DN27ND (talk) 18:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since wikipedia contributors aren't allowed to upload primary sources, in essence we are using journalist's opinions (ie journalist from the NY times, OC register, People magazine, Asahi Shimbun, Wall Street Journal, etc) as sources of evidence. Do you think the vetting process to obtain a journalist / reporter pass from these companies is strenuous?
In essence, it would be way easier, "neutral", and encyclopedic if wikipedia contributers were able to use primary sources as evidence rather than secondary, or tertiary sources written by "experts" hired by these media companies. DN27ND (talk) 18:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check out the results of the 1969 Judo World Championships
Is that not a podium sweep where one team had a decisive victory over the other teams? That is the time of only 2 times this has happened in the sports history. If the phrases "dream team" or "talented group" is not appropriate to describe the sporting results. Perhaps those words need to be censored from all other wikipedia articles about sports where these words have been used to describe competition results. DN27ND (talk) 12:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That 1969 World Judo team had multiple World and Olympic champions on them. In the sport of judo, the World Championships are regarded as a more difficult achievement than the Olympics due to their respective qualification processes. DN27ND (talk) 12:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are also many other newspaper and magazine articles that show Bunasawa's notability on the wikipedia article.
Rezell, John (March 3, 1988). "Top Judo Instructor comes to the defense of self-defense". Orange County Register.
"Judo". Orange Network. 385: 7. April 2023.
New Judo Instructor at 'Y' Here". Indiana Evening Gazette. February 21, 1975
"Instructor on Show". Rogers Daily News. April 1975.
I could scan these newspaper articles and send them to you. Or you can go into the library archives and look them up yourself.DN27ND (talk) 12:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notice: I didn't question the person's notability. I'm questioning COI and your understanding of Wikipedia's editing style. These walls of text and excessive bolding are not necessary; I can read. 104.232.119.107 (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the original poster (Marchjuly) did question notability and it is part of this page's discussion
People have occupations, other obligations, and commenting on wikipedia doesn't pay the bills. I'm not sure if Marchjuly was expecting an immediate response or what? DN27ND (talk) 18:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet WP:GNG. The only reference link is their company website. The company seems to have supported many famous race drivers, but as per WP:ORGDEPTH, most of the articles speak about the racers and there is no significant coverage on the company itself.
Wikilover3509 (talk) 6:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Keep: If you got rid of this one page youd have to get rid of all of these pages too Category:Scheduled motorsport seasons Multiple of those articles lack in real infomation and are full of TBCs. MotoGP and WRC dont even have the race calendar on them, but rather contracted races. There is sources about what tracks are holding what. And the dates. AidenT06 (talk) 22:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: AidenT06 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]
Keep: This championship is a GT championshio just like the British GT Championship and Intercontinental GT Challenge, in which this championship has also valid pages for the 2025 seasons right now. And the race calendar was already published for the next year. So, this page should be kept. And I really agree @AidenT06 for his opinion. There are two important categories already including the next seasons of motorsport championships, Category:2025 in motorsport and Category:Scheduled motorsport seasons. So, if you got rid of this page, why did not you get rid of the pages of all 2025 seasons, also for F1, WEC, and so on? Apeiro94 (talk) 05:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – Quick search for sources show that we're still in the early announcements stage of planning for the season. Deletion is unwarranted but could do with further development in draft space before being moved to main later this year when there will presumably be some more meaty content to discuss. Neither keep vote makes any substantial argument, both rely on WP:OTHERSTUFF appeals. 5225C (talk • contributions) 08:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources.C67907:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Keep. The fact that the sources are related to the speedway does not make them non-independent. Per WP:GNG "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. These sources could be considered affiliated with him if, for example, he were their owner. I would add a few more secondary sources [28][29][30]Tau Corvi (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I saw the RSN discussion first, so I do not plan to vote, but to give my opinion from my limited perspective. Having taken a look at Scunthorpe Scorpions, which looks like two different teams on one article, I can count about five dozen riders that have articles. Of the "Notable riders," most of them use "speedway related sources" in their articles with British Speedway cited between two and three dozen times. (More problematic, but farther outside of the discussion is that at least one article is citing sources that are MREL and GUNREL.)
Overall, the issue over the specific sources is going to have an effect on other articles. If deemed a problem, then there will need to be more AfD discussions in the near future; while if deemed acceptable could lead to additional article creations. I am of the opinion that redirects to the team articles could be more preferred than deletion and that some information might be includable in the various team articles. That said, I am unsure if the sources are a problem on these rider articles. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand muti page move would have likely been a better format for this discussion, however the template did not seem to function properly. Mn1548 (talk) 10:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An alternative could be to merge/redirect to 2022 NRL season#Pre-season, adding details from the background but not the fixtures section. There are only four NRL teams without 2022 season articles, Raiders, Roosters, Tigers, and Warriors, so all the matches apart from 2 (Roosters against Raiders and Tigers) are covered by these articles. EdwardUK (talk) 13:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Disagreeing with the contention to rename the 2023 and 2024 articles. Both include additional information (trials, All Stars etc) that don't quite fit into the NRL's "Pre-season Challenge" nomenclature. I think the article in question here is a reasonable fork from the 2022 NRL season results article, which effectively captures the intention of these pre-season results articles. If anything (and this is especially true in the WP:RL space), these articles just require more prose. Storm machine (talk) 23:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Generally agree with most of this, though it still doesn't cover my main issue with the page - its title. "2022 NRL season results" implies there is some sort of formal organisation by the NRL, which there wasn't until 2023 and the pre-season challenge. Re 2023 and 2024, the non pre-season challenge information is minimal, and can be moved to the pre-season section of the respective NRL season page leaving the pre-season page as purely pre-season challenge information. Mn1548 (talk) 10:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do not comment on these articles here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, the remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.
Delete: Brief ESPN bio [34] and routine transfer mentions [35], neither of which are useful for notability here. Sourcing in the article is of the same quality, non-helpful. Oaktree b (talk) 21:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Google search on the name brought back nothing other than database sources. Soccerway link on the page with the corresponding DoB confirms he played one season in the Portuguese third tier in 2013-14. C67911:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This Slovak men's footballer played in his country from 2013 until 2016 before moving to lower leagues in the Czech Republic and Poland. Secondary sources analysis from my searches through translation:
Žilinský Večerník is a blogspot containing an interview with just secondary content in the opening paragraph.
SME seems to be a decent source mentioning Klec scoring a hat-trick.
Dnes24 is a transfer announcement of him moving to Třinec on loan.
Dziennik Polski is another transfer announcement to Puszcza Niepołomice.
In my opinion, none of those sources above actually approach WP:SIGCOV that are required for encyclopedia. I have checked corresponding articles on him in other Wikipedia languages, but all of them likewise provide match reports, primary sources, and database.
⋆｡˚꒰ঌClara A. Djalim໒꒱˚｡⋆13:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is only one source listed in the article, and I couldn’t find any others. If you manage to do this, please ping me. Tau Corvi (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I per nom, above. I couldn't find a sinlge article even mentioning her via a Newsbank database search. Fails GNG. Cabrils (talk) 00:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. I've only found one secondary source that talks directly about him [36]. I think this is not enough to confirm the significance. The source Geschichte cites is an interview, that is, a primary source. Tau Corvi (talk) 19:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Geschichte. The source contains enough independent commentary on the subject to qualify as significant coverage. The source found by Tau Corvi is significant as well. A FIFA World Cup player is virtually certain to pass GNG, and its worth noting that we do not have access to 1990s Czechslovak newspapers. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Geschichte's source is an interview with Kinier where the only independent info is clubs/countries he played for and not playing in the 1984 Olympics. Tau Corvi's source is better but they aren't enough for a GNG pass. https://kramerius5.nkp.cz/ has Czech newspapers and https://dikda.snk.sk/ Slovak newspapers. His 260 top flight appearances are irrelevant. Dougal18 (talk) 09:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His 260 top flight appearances are irrelevant. – Common. sense. For modern European players (I'm talking internet era), where we have full-access to sources, can you find anyone with 260 top-flight appearances who is non-notable? Can you find a single modern European FIFA World Cup player for which there is no sigcov? Why would the 1980s be any different? Tau Corvi's source satisfies WP:SPORTCRIT, which should be all that is needed to allow this to be kept given the subject. (As for the links you provide, I've never seen those websites before. How in-depth are their 1980s newspaper collections?) BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, Dougal18 and Tau Corvi are correct. WP:SPORTSBASIC #5 states: Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. The source given by Tau Corvi looks like SIGCOV thing, but GNG requires multiple in-depth coverage as possible overall instead of just one. Even if the paywalled Sme newspaper contains SIGCOV, that is still not equivalent to GNG. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌClara A. Djalim໒꒱˚｡⋆14:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Kinier is still a local football legend in Žilina but as he played in communist Czechoslovakia online coverage of his career is not the best. However, there is in fact a full page coverage (not an interview) published by the Štart magazine in 1985. The magazine does not exist anymore, but the issue can be accessed by registered users through the digital repository of the Slovak National Library. Happy to improve the article further when/if I find more sources. Newklear007 (talk) 12:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominating based on lack of notability. Only references are with brief text in minor and local sports news coverage, biography external link is dead. User:WoodElf16:59, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that the locality of the sources is irrelevant. As long as it is significant coverage and independent of the subject it can go towards establish notability of the subject. This for instance should be considered significant coverage. However, the subjects needs sustained coverage, that is coverage from another time period than around his hiring at Louisiana–Monroe in July 2017. Alvaldi (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG (which says that these must meet GNG) Of the sources, 2 are just database listings and the other is about a game where he is mentioned. North8000 (talk) 20:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the only remotely RS I can find are brief mentions of him in reports of matches. It sounds like he might become notable as his career progresses, but right now is TOOSOON. StartGrammarTime (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draft According to soccerway he hasn't played any games. So those trophies? Are they really earned? If the article was improved with better sourcing I might send to draft, in it's current state I would delete. Also @ Mohamedmokhtar22 Why do you have two accounts? Govvy (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I didn't find any articles about him in RS, only statistics and news on the website of the club for which he plays. Tau Corvi (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD might be exactly the same issue as with Peter Kondrát I nominated back in January under my old username (CuteDolphin712). Since Martin Liška was born in Brno, Czech Republic, but represents Slovakia, I don't know which language of source is primary.
The only decent site I found in Slovak language is SME but it looks nowhere near significant.
Oddly enough, Czech media IDNES (2016, 2018, 2022) and Czech Television have articles of a horseback rider of the same name. However, the first source by IDNES tells said jockey turned 39 thus clearly not the same men as this cyclist. Without evidence of cyclist Liška being a horse jockey in his hometown, this case fails WP:V.
Although subject may be covered by WP:NCRICKET(Additionally, cricketers who have played at the highest domestic level [...] may have sufficient coverage about them to justify an article, but it should not be assumed to exist without further proof), with a single appearance for a club side more than 20 years ago, there is no indication the subject has received significant coverage to pass the general notability guideline. C67910:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - either one article is the problem or thousands. And if we isolate individual articles - in both English and non-English speaking countries - this does nothing to solve the problem we've landed ourselves in. Bobo.17:30, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources.C67907:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. - Although subject may meet WP:NGRIDIRON as stated in the last AfD (2011), this does not establish sufficient notability. C67906:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
Does not meet WP:SPORTSCRIT, Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Previously deleted by PROD. C67903:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 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.
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 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.
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.
RedirecttoCzech Republic at the 2022 Winter Olympics#Luge as I could not find enough in-depth coverage of this athlete to meet WP:GNG. I've checked corresponding Wikipedia article in other languages, especially the Czech one that might help copy over English article, but none of them provide significant coverage on him. One-time Olympics participant, Lejsek was not even one of the three luge medalists in pre-mentioned tournament either. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌClara A. Djalim໒꒱˚｡⋆15:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. World Championships participant in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2023. European Championships participant in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023. (According to Whatlinkshere, haven't clicked them yet.) Geschichte (talk) 20:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Keep. The fact that the sources are related to the speedway does not make them non-independent. Per WP:GNG "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. These sources could be considered affiliated with him if, for example, he were their owner. I would add a few more secondary sources [54][55][56]Tau Corvi (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I saw the RSN discussion first, so I do not plan to vote, but to give my opinion from my limited perspective. Having taken a look at Scunthorpe Scorpions, which looks like two different teams on one article, I can count about five dozen riders that have articles. Of the "Notable riders," most of them use "speedway related sources" in their articles with British Speedway cited between two and three dozen times. (More problematic, but farther outside of the discussion is that at least one article is citing sources that are MREL and GUNREL.)
Overall, the issue over the specific sources is going to have an effect on other articles. If deemed a problem, then there will need to be more AfD discussions in the near future; while if deemed acceptable could lead to additional article creations. I am of the opinion that redirects to the team articles could be more preferred than deletion and that some information might be includable in the various team articles. That said, I am unsure if the sources are a problem on these rider articles. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
So what exactly makes this guy notable? Being the son of Michael Vaughan, is all I can tell. He hasn't played cricket at a senior level and hasn't done anything of note in cricket to warrant inclusion. No amount of WP:ROUTINE refbombs can hide that he is a WP:GNG fail. AA (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I don’t understand whether he has already played for Somerset and the England U19 to pass WP:NCRIC, but signing a contract with the club and being called up to the U19 team is being covered in the media, which indicates the passage WP:SIGCOV. I will list several secondary sources, you can easily find more [57][58][59]Tau Corvi (talk) 14:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But why is that notable? Plenty of people get signed by major sports teams and never go onto do anything. Is the bar really set this low? Again, if his father wasn't a famous cricketer, he would not get any coverage. AA (talk) 22:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article was moved to mainspace via Afc. Subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Hildreth gazzard (talk) 00:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Widespread coverage in established media including BBC, Sky Sports, The Times, The Daily Telegraph The Independent, ESPNCricinfo etc. Yes the articles often mention his father in the headline or the article themselves but that is going to be the case his entire life unless he manages to totally surpass what his father achieved which is a high bar to set. The articles themselves are about him, not his father, and as such he easily passes the coverage test. Shrug02 (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
jomhornews.com, 
m.kun.uz, 
trt.net.tr, and 
sport.kg. Lunar Spectrum96 (talk) 10:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
N. 
