Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caleal Walker

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The arguments to delete have it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:46, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Caleal Walker

[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)

Fails WP:GNG. Only two sources I was able to find that aren't trivial are Omaha South’s Caleal Walker shines in all-star game and Caleal Walker, Omaha South. Runningibis (talk) 20:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 August 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:06, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In addition to the two sources that are mentioned above, which are the strongest, there is also [1] [2] [3] [4] plus other, smaller mentions. GNG is met. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 21:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Most of, if not all of the additional links you provided are passing mentions, like stat lines. Runningibis (talk) 22:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - room for improvement for sure, but WP:GNG is at least met and as such deletion is not necessary. Kirbanzo (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nebraska-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG with lack of significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. As stated in the nomination, we don't count trivial mentions. Additionally, many of the other hits I found are from non-independent sources like his school or league. Playing in the fledgling Junior Basketball Association of Lavar Ball does not satisfy WP:NHOOPS.—Bagumba (talk) 09:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I think we should have some notability guidelines for the JBA. As it stands Walker should probably still meet GNG since there are multiple sources covering him in some detail. If you disagree with this, I think it is a good place to apply WP:IAR since we can write a decent article based on the sources available. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 14:57, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - No we shouldn’t. The JBA is barely covered in the cities it plays in, let alone nationally. If the profile rises, then we should reconsider. I’ll take a look at GNG for this guy soon and weigh in. Rikster2 (talk) 21:46, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - The article is mostly based off of non-independent sources. Per the guideline WP:WHYN: We require that all articles rely primarily on "third-party" or "independent sources" so that we can write a fair and balanced article that complies with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and to ensure that articles are not advertising a product, service, or organization. I wouldn't advocate IAR to violate the WP:NPOV policy.—Bagumba (talk) 08:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - I didn't say anything about not having a neutral article. My point was that if an article can be this well written and sourced, then it should be kept, not that we need to wax poetic about his exploits. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 23:28, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - You didn't mention neutrality; I did, per WP:WHYN. If the sources aren't independent, neutrality is a natural concern. Thus, I would not use IAR here as you are advocating.—Bagumba (talk) 07:42, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I just don’t see the independent, non-routine coverage at the level to satisfy WP:GNG - not on the article and not when I do an independent Google search. Rikster2 (talk) 21:51, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet our absurdly low notability criteria for basketball players.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
delete Routine sports reporting is not enough to meet the GNG. Also fails WP:NHOOPS. Sandals1 (talk) 21:56, 5 September 2018 (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.