Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney Boneparte

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 13:04, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rodney Boneparte

[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)

Possibly fails WP:GNG and, to my knowledge, referees do not gain automatic notability just for officiating in a professional match. This is at least the rule in football. A South African search comes up with some coverage but it's almost all just passing mentions about games that he assisted with Rugby365, SA Rugby Mag and News24. Does not meet the WP:BASIC element of WP:BIO. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete We tend to go with someone who's officiated a top level competition as being notable as a rule of thumb. Boneparte refereed a few Currie Cup matches, but probably not enough for automatic notability. As nom says, lots of passing mentions, but not enough for a GNG pass. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 11:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:44, 27 July 2021 (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.