Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Quintana

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. BeanieFan11's findings provided consensus. (non-admin closure) TLA (talk) 21:28, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Quintana

[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:GNG Joeykai (talk) 17:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball. Joeykai (talk) 17:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Quintana meets the WP:GNG with sources such as [[1]] and [[2]]. Let'srun (talk) 00:08, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~. The profile in the Arizona Daily Star states that it's a countdown of the "50 best athletes on the University of Arizona campus right now, with help from athletes, coaches, and those close to the program." This is not going to be fully independent coverage, and the fact that the author is doing these profiles for 50 current student-athletes at the school suggests this is closer to a routine local news profile. Note also that the author attended the same school, where he was presumably quite affiliated with Wildcats sporting staff through working at the school newspaper. The combination of all these factors makes me discount this source. The other news piece (from the same outlet) is a passing mention totaling two sentences on him.

JoelleJay (talk) 01:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per below.

JoelleJay (talk) 02:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Let'srun found some coverage that can contribute to GNG, but if that and what's in the article is all there is, it's short of where I put the GNG bar. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There appears to be a good amount of coverage of him, e.g. Arizona Daily Star feature, another, another, another, then MLive, Detroit Free Press, The Arizona Republic, Detroit News, Baseball America, etc. @JoelleJay and Muboshgu: BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first two non-ADS are announcements that are routine for baseball coverage, the third is actually also by ADS, but the Detroit News one looks good. JoelleJay (talk) 01:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I’m unable to access the ADS sources by Beanie, so I can’t comment on those. For the others, Detroit Free Press and Arizona Republic are both routine draft coverage and MLive is a retirement post that isn’t substantial. Of interest is Detroit News and Baseball America, which both cover Quintana’s struggles in the minors. While both have substantial content, plenty of other minor league players also struggle, don’t make it, and unfortunately don’t get an article as there wasn’t other notable coverage.

There just isn’t anything else going for Quintana like being a top prospect that busted (he was a second-rounder with some power) that builds enough of a case to pass WP:GNG for me. Sources in article are mostly statistical and the sources provided by Letsrun is based on his time in college that seems routine. Searches for other sources just drew up more local college coverage or minor league trades that happen all the time. RolledOut34 // (talk) // (cont) 04:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- The ADS sources are all extensive in-depth feature stories on Quintana. The Detroit News and Baseball America both do count towards GNG as whether "plenty of other minor league players struggle" is irrelevant; what matters is whether they have significant coverage which is all that is necessary for GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets GNG with the multiple feature articles posted by BeanieFan11. Hatman31 (talk) 17:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Beanie's findings. - Skipple ☎ 19:37, 16 February 2024 (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.