Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Eubank, Jr.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 redirect to Chris Eubank. Poorly sourced BLP. Consider this a no consensus close but please do not undo the redirect without adding more sources, No prejudice against a speedy renomination. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Chris Eubank, Jr. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Amateur boxer whose notability appears to be inherited from Chris Eubank. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ATHLETE. CharlieEchoTango 23:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The current text of the article doesn't appear to establish notability per WP:ATHLETE#Boxing. Richwales (talk · contribs) 06:03, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cerejota (talk) 07:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep. Notability is not inherited but he keeps getting mentioned in the media because he has done well as an amateur and they keep on reminding the world whose son he is. So I think that he is a weak keep that meets WP:GNG even though he doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE. Moreover, he is on the cusp of turning pro. See http://www.worldboxingnews.net/2011/06/chris-eubank-jr-set-to-turn.html (which means that he will meet WP:ATHLETE shortly after you delete him). Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 13:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2011 (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.