Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Burns (sportscaster)

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The result was withdrawn by nominator. ✗plicit 00:08, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Burns (sportscaster)

[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)

Non-notable motorsports reporter. No evidence of any independent SIGCOV outside of the already-cited MLive.com article. Fails NBASIC. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 23:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 23:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 23:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:05, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails the GNG.
5225_C (talk • contributions) 05:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - In addition to the Mlive source in the article (originally published in 2014) there is also one originally published in 2011, and both offer biographical and career context; together they seem to create one source that also expresses interest over time in Burns. A bylined 2021 Motorsport.com article offers some commentary and context about him and other reporters, as does a bylined 2017 Fox Sports article titled Top Five NASCAR TV Pit Reporters of All-Time. There is also an article mostly based on an interview but has some WP:SECONDARY context from The Buffalo News in 2015: NBC pit reporter Burns cutting to the Chase. I think the variety of sources over time, as well as the depth of context and commentary available, favors keeping and improving the article per WP:BASIC, which includes If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. Beccaynr (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm somewhat convinced by this argument, so striking my !vote.
5225_C (talk • contributions) 00:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw. Beccaynr, you're awesome. Thank you for finding these. With 5225C's delete !vote stricken, I can withdraw this now. Being named in a list with Dick Berggren and Chris Economaki, even as an honourable mention, is certainly notable. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 02:25, 21 October 2021 (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.