Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armand Biniakounou

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 Navify‎. There is a consensus to turn this into a NAVPAGE. (non-admin closure) Toadspike [Talk] 14:57, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Armand Biniakounou

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. The added sources are not indepth. [1], [2] and [3] are merely small 1 line mentions and not SIGCOV to meet WP:SPORTSCRIT. LibStar (talk) 22:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Sport of athletics, and Africa. LibStar (talk) 22:57, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on WP:NEXIST. I didn't create the article, but I found several new sources on the subject and improved the article with them just before it was nominated. Subject was a two-time Olympian and was honored as an expert representing his country to World Athletics years after the fact. There are newspapers in the Republic of the Congo that would have covered this at the time that can be used to further improve the article. --Habst (talk) 12:41, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
being a 2 time Olympian doesn't guarantee inherent notability. LibStar (talk) 23:07, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not guaranteed, but I think the WP:V info we have as confirmed by several WP:RS is enough to be confident that more sourcing exists out there. --Habst (talk) 13:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:MUSTBESOURCES LibStar (talk) 13:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I actually agree with that essay, but I don't think it applies here. It says "Any claim that sources exist must be verifiable" and in this case we do have WP:Verifiable info evidencing that sources exist, namely his two Olympic appearances and coaching honors. --Habst (talk) 15:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because someone participated in the Olympics and coached doesn't mean they have WP:SIGCOV. Let'srun (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak Keep: there are some coverage here and there for and beyond the Olympics, thus I favour keeping the article. FuzzyMagma (talk) 08:11, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Redirect Per below To meet GNG we need significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources. None of the sources in this article meet that definition. Per nom., 1 line mentions are not significant coverage. News reports and listings are not secondary. We are not even close to a GNG pass and as WP:NATH is not met, there is no presumption that sources are likely to exist so the NEXIST argument is spurious. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noting the navify suggestion from FrankAnchor, I would have no objection to that as an alternative to redirect. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:17, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Not that it helps (it's an interview), but he seems to be involved with the national athletics association lately [4]. Match results here [5], and one other hit in that "Athletisme" magazine, again only a match report. Oaktree b (talk) 14:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sources exist, but they're all trivial mentions. At least one SIGCOV and I'd probably give this a !weak keep vote. Oaktree b (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. Redirect. Passing mentions do not count as SIGCOV, which is required to be cited in the article per NSPORT. Searches in PQ return nothing. JoelleJay (talk) 15:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is PQ? --Habst (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that they might be referring to ProQuest. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. It's certainly worth a search and I appreciate the effort, but I'm not sure why we would consider searching that archive of primarily academic content sufficient enough to !vote delete while actual Republic of Congo newspapers that would have covered the subject haven't been checked yet. --Habst (talk) 18:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Proquest has a global newspaper search, including a historical newspaper collection which includes titles from the Republic of Congo. Definitely a good place to check. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 19:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, I agree it's a good place to search and I appreciate the effort. The issue in this case is the most likely venue for sourcing isn't on the ProQuest historical newspaper archives but the actual ROC newspapers listed above, whose archives are not available on any online resource including ProQuest. --Habst (talk) 20:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What Congolese newspapers are in ProQuest? BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We don't know for sure that he would have been covered there though. Let'srun (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect~~ to Republic of the Congo at the 1988 Summer Olympics#Athletics. Fails GNG due to lack of SIGCOV; everything in the article or discussed here is routine. Republic of the Congo at the 1992 Summer Olympics#Athletics is a suitable redirect target as well but I prefer 1988 because he had a better finish. Having multiple valid redirect targets is not grounds to choose neither and delete anyway. Frank Anchor 17:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to navify, which was suggested as an WP:ATD by @Dclemens1971: on another AFD of a similar subject. Dclemens summarizes it well on that page, There's a new template ({{Navigation page}}) for an alternative to disambiguation/redirection that I think we could try here, particularly since there are multiple pages that discuss this athlete. It would serve the same function as a redirect but would provide more visibility for the page should future SIGCOV become available to support a standalone page that complies with WP:NSPORT. Sample:.

Wikipedia does not have an article on Armand Biniakounou, but you can read about this topic in the following articles:
Republic of the Congo at the 1988 Summer Olympics#Athletics

Republic of the Congo at the 1992 Summer Olympics#Athletics

Redirect to Republic of the Congo at the 1988 Summer Olympics#Athletics: Subject does not appear to meet the relevant notability criteria due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV. WP:SPORTSBASIC requires at least one piece of WP:SIGCOV to be in the article, and currently none exist. What is in the article includes some database and match results (1-3), along with some passing mentions (4-6), none of which contribute to notability. Redirect, but do not merge, as a WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 17:41, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with a !redirect as suggested, if it goes that way. Oaktree b (talk) 00:32, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also okay with navifying this as well. Let'srun (talk) 01:20, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I have no doubt that he's notable. Athletes of his accomplishments for countries of this size get coverage. I've tried contacting the Congo news agency but they haven't responded (I've also contacted African news agencies in multiple other countries for similar AFDs, but none of them have responded either... ugh...). The best result, given that this is likely not going to be kept although it should be, would be to redirect it to one of the Congo Olympics pages with a note mentioning that he participated at another Olympics and the other details from this bio, such as how I did it for a similar subject here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:24, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A note that he participated in another Olympics is fine. Other details from his bio I don't think is warranted with the lack of secondary coverage, although that is a better discussion for the article talk page after a final target has been identified. Let'srun (talk) 13:05, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Navify: as suggested by Frank above. Addresses the problem of multiple appropriate redirects and provide sufficient visibility to the page for future expansion should sources become available to warrant standalone coverage. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2025 (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.