Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dike Eddleman Athlete of the Year

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:48, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dike Eddleman Athlete of the Year[edit]

[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 award - shockingly little coverage of any kind (doing a search for "Dike Eddleman Athlete of the Year" with quotes only comes up with 60 unique Google results) and not the kind of RS that would support LISTN. This is not even necessarily notable for the individual athletes either - in the well researched GA Dick Butkus this award isn't even mentioned for him. It's a gorgeous table but given its size I don't know that there is a good merge target for it either. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. 94rain ^Talk 14:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. 94rain ^Talk 14:47, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, plus an encouragement to the initial editor to create equally beautiful tables for slightly less obscure awards. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:51, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. MrClog (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the award is not mentioned on the University of Illinois website - I would recommend a Redirect, but the award is not mentioned in any of the University of Illinois campus articles - does not meet WP:GNG - has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" - therefore, delete - Epinoia (talk) 04:14, 15 May 2019 (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.