Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Johnson (sports administrator)

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 speedy keep. Missvain (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

James Johnson (sports administrator)[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)

Football executive who fails GNG and NFOOTY. Majority of media mentions of him are trivial or passing at best. The article is basically a resume. BlameRuiner (talk) 18:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 19:34, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see nothing special here for the article to be kept. It reads like a CV and not like a bio. Govvy (talk) 20:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - there's decent coverage out there, including this, and plenty of coverage about his appointment from across the globe that goes beyond NOTNEWS. It needs improving, not deleting. Giant Snowman 22:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The head of the governing body of a sport in a major country is generally notable. Plenty of sourcing. It's a normal biography, not a "resume". -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - plenty of reliable sources out there establishing his notability, and as Necrothesp says, the head of a governing body of sport in a country is usually notable. This does not fall into the category of advertisement or resume. Should not have been brought to AfD (and WP:NOTCLEANUP should be compulsory reading). Deus et lex (talk) 11:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- It was actually originally prodded! Another example, I'm afraid, of how prodding is being misused on articles that are clearly not uncontroversial deletions. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:03, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and close: I am surprised to find how people are editing the pages from a long time and clear example of editors misusing editing powers. This executive is blindly notable however deleting editor cannot find it, he first prodded it, then he again raised AFD. I will suggest him to first Google about pages and then raise AFD after detailed search, it will help a lot. He seems to be active and really his previous prodded pages needs to be re-evaluated. 2001:8003:4030:7E00:E835:4BBC:551B:EA63 (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this passes WP:BASIC even just from the sources in the article Spiderone 19:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - passes WP:GNG as per current sourcing, and a cursory WP:BEFORE.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:29, 4 December 2020 (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.