Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guram Kavtidze

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. ✗plicit 12:29, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guram Kavtidze

[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 player, even by the somewhat more lax standards of the old WP:NSPORT (and definitely not by the new). Not finding any significant coverage to demonstrate WP:GNG being met. Primefac (talk) 09:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Sports, Rugby union, France, and Georgia (country). Primefac (talk) 09:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG. I'm not really seeing enough to suggest a pass, although there may be coverage in French sources that I've not seen. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 19:09, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Le Progres might help with notability if anyone can access it, that is. I'm not really seeing much else, though. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: BLP, fails GNG and BIO. Sources in article and BEFORE showed nothing from IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source in article is database record, source above is about a game. WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy (WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines (WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV). // Timothy :: talk 23:36, 1 May 2023 (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.