Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Lesovsky

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. Killiondude (talk) 05:23, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Lesovsky

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG with very few sources, none of which appear to be significant and non-WP:ROUTINE coverage. The coverage is the typical routine coverage from local news (statements from the coach in previews/postgame coverage) or of his hiring as a low level basketball coach. Well below the the standards of WP:NHOOPS as well. Yosemiter (talk) 16:55, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seems silly, I was thinking this wouldn't make it either, but there's a good amount of coverage in the news such as The London Free Press. Turns out he was a head coach of a team in the National Basketball League of Canada which seems to be the top level of the sport professionally in the country. Passes WP:GNG. Wow.--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Paulmcdonald: That appears to be WP:ROUTINE game coverage of regional playoff game (in my opinion anyways), which I did mention exists in my nom as it has a couple of statements by him on what he though of his team's performance. It should also be noted that the NBL Canada may be the top Canada-only basketball league, the top league in Canada is still the NBA. Based on media coverage the NBLC gets almost as much as the D/G League (more in the Atlantic provinces and London due to its success) and the level of play is about on par with mid-level Euro leagues, the former Premier Basketball League (where some of the teams originated), the Continental Basketball Association, and the new North American Premier Basketball (where Lesovsky now coaches). But it you feel that routine game coverage with mentions and brief statements merits WP:GNG, then you have the right to your opinion. Yosemiter (talk) 15:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Feature articles are WP:NOTROUTINE as most of the articles take quotes and go far beyond just the scores.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:42, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete routine coverage is not enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:47, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:12, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG with lack of significant coverage in multiple, independent sources. Fails WP:NHOOPS as well. As the coach, he seems to have an obligatory quote or two in some routine game recaps. However, a meaningful biography cannot be written based merely off of the subject's own quotes. Per WP:WHYN, significant coverage is needed "so that we can actually write a whole article, rather than half a paragraph or a definition of that topic." This is not encyclopedic enough to WP:IAR and keep an article that will never be more useful than a stub with past stints listed.—Bagumba (talk) 16:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree. Stub articles are valid articles and the sources cited are not "routine" game recaps--at least, not as defined by WP:ROUTINE and that's the definition that should be use.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:20, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Paulmcdonald: If that were true, then most every high school basketball coach would also qualify for articles. Would you argue Jaso Perez, Cresenta Valley High School girls' basketball coach is notable? He gets similar coverage in the LA Times. Maybe Aubrey Shelton, Lincoln High School boys' basketball coach in Tacoma with equivalent coverage in the Seattle Times and The News Tribune? Personally, I view game summaries as an extension of ROUTINE as they are entirely expected to be covered in local papers and are not feature articles on coaches (they would be singularly feature articles on local games, and that is definitely defined in WP:MILL as routine). Yosemiter (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - (edit conflict) @Paul: WP:ROUTINE calls out "Planned coverage of scheduled events". The London Free Press article that you linked in your !vote was the recap of Game 2 of a series, or coverage that the newspaper planned for a scheduled event. Stubs are acceptable when they can be expanded to a whole article, which I do not believe is possible here.—Bagumba (talk) 17:51, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Right now there is a lot of "planned coverage" of the 2018 State of the Union Address and there was plenty of "planned coverage" for the 2016 United States Presidential Election or Super Bowl LII. By your argument, since that was all "planned events" and only received "planned coverage" we should delete those articles too. But we won't, because that would be silly. Instead, we look at the definition that applies to sporting events in WP:ROUTINE which is "sports scores." Further, WP:ROUTINE only applies to events anyway.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:26, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Per WP:SPORTCRIT regarding a sportsperson's notability: "Local sources must be clearly independent of the subject, and must provide reports beyond routine game coverage."—Bagumba (talk) 23:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - I agree. The sources are clearly independent of the subject and clearly provide reports beyond routine game coverage.--Paul McDonald (talk) 00:16, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Then why the rant over WP:ROUTINE only applying to events. LOL—Bagumba (talk) 00:56, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. game summaries are routine because they cover every game, and almost none of the games themselves are of individual importance. DGG ( talk ) 00:39, 2 February 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.