Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Leach

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. Missvain (talk) 00:39, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Leach

[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)

Passes WP:NFOOTY from one appearance for Wycombe but recent consensus at AfD has placed more importance on WP:GNG in these cases. Aside from one source, I can't see anything else giving him significant coverage. Please see here for consensus that these articles should be deleted. Spiderone 19:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 19:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 19:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets NFOOTBALL, there's coverage out there, had a significant non-league career (played for Dunstable Town, Hitchin Town, Arlesey Town, Hendon, Aylesbury United, Slough Town, Yeading, Wingate & Finchley, Hemel Hempstead Town, Berkhamsted Town, Northwood, Boreham Wood, Chesham United) - searching his name and those clubs brings back more and more coverage. Giant Snowman 22:17, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unless the page reflects what GiantSnowman said, and I really don't consider that career notable really. I am more inclined to say delete for the article failing GNG. There also appears to be a boxer with the same name, don't know if it's the same person. Unless the article was improved I am still going to say delete. Govvy (talk) 11:24, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Definitely not the same guy per BoxRec -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:27, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article needing improvement is not a reason for deletion. Giant Snowman 21:51, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - He definitely has played for a lot of clubs but the coverage is bordering on routine [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. This one is probably the best but it's still quite weak. Spiderone 14:46, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Appears to fail WP:GNG. I agree that the Bucks Free Press article could be in-depth coverage (it BFP a regional newspaper that could qualify under GNG?), but there needs to be more, and everything else looks routine. Jogurney (talk) 04:25, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Not enough reliable independent coverage to satisfy WP:GNG , Alex-h (talk) 11:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per above. Fails WP:GNG Sliekid (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a total and complete failure of GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:24, 30 November 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.