Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Egerson

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 keep. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:31, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Egerson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:NBASKETBALL Mayumashu (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The New York Times ran an article about him [1] and AOLNews.com did as well [2]. When the NYT writes about you, you're doing something right (or, incidentally in this case, something wrong). Jrcla2 (talk) 05:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep – per coverage in reliable sources:

Thamel, Pete (March 30, 2007). "Georgetown Player's Ignominious Mark". The New York Times. Retrieved December 5, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
"John Thompson's Shameful Recruitment of Marc Egerson". AOL News. March 31, 2007. Retrieved December 5, 2011. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has coverage. Dream Focus 19:18, 9 December 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.