Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Oates

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Oates[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)

No evidence of notability. He has played two games in the Danish 3rd division[1], has a world ranking from ca. #1500, and hasn't received the necessary attention from independent WP:RS to have an article here (yet). Fram (talk) 15:19, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:19, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:19, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant guidelines are at WP:NBADMINTON. He comes close to meeting the threshold by representing Wales at the 2020 European Men's and Women's Team Badminton Championships. Unfortunately Wales didn't proceed beyond the group stage of that competition. He may compete in the 2022 Commonwealth Games.[2] He doesn't quite meet WP:NBADMINTON, but in my view some of the notability thresholds are unduly restrictive. We could redirect to Wales national badminton team, but there is little content in that article. I would not have nominated this. Verbcatcher (talk) 00:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is close to meeting guidelines with a view to future potential at 2022 Commonwealth games. He represents Wales who do regularly send athletes to Commonwealth games and Olympic games. Notability is he has played 2 Team matches in Danish Badminton 3rd division. Interesting submission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.232.128 (talk) 14:55, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, leaning to keep Upcoming international player. Good background coverage at anchor.fm and YCsports.com SportsOlympic (talk) 18:20, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Those two are only one source, a podcast and their youtube channel. A podcast with 149 subscribers, and without much notability otherwise[3]. Fram (talk) 07:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:TOOSOON. "Future potential in next year's games" is not an argument for notability here and now. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:35, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:40, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This individual fails the relevant WP:NSPORT guideline and appears to fail WP:NBASIC based upon my analysis of sources. The article sources do not confer notability on the individual, nor do sources that I can find on the internet. The sole keep !vote appears to rely on a WP:CRYSTAL argument, indicating that the individual might become notable in the future as he's "up-and-coming". This doesn't convince me to !vote for keep. Obviously, this individual could be notable if additional sources were to be published in the future that help to satisfy WP:BASIC, but this is almost tautological—it isn't a reason to keep an article. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 03:17, 6 November 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.