Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Liedel

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 13:23, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Liedel[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)

Fails WP:COLLATH and WP:SPORTBASIC. No significant independent secondary coverage. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, and Michigan. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 00:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete most players in division 1 college men's basketball are not notable. Even fewer in divsion 1 college women's basketball. I am willing to guess that no one anywhere is notable for playing in division 2 college women's basketball.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:59, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It looks like she has two sources that discuss her as an individual from Yahoo News and Monroe News. Its true that it's only division one, but WP:COLLATH says its notable if they have national coverage. PaulPachad (talk) 18:49, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no national coverage, which still needs to be sustained. The Yahoo article is just a local newspaper article reposted so we really have two writeups in Liedel's hometown newspaper and not much else. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. Non-independent coverage from sources affiliated with her, such as her school, do not count towards notability. The only other significant coverage I found was from Monroe News. Per GNG: Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability. More independent, reliable sources of signifcant coverage is needed.—Bagumba (talk) 07:50, 5 June 2022 (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.