Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Jock

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. with no prejudice to an eventual new nomination due to minimal participation. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 04:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Super Jock[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Super Jock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I prodded this with "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies)'s requirement for products. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. It was deprodded without any meaningful comment, so let's discuss... can anyone find anything to rescue here? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:11, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Aside from a paragraph in a source which I'm not sure if it is an RS (and anyways is not significant coverage), there is no coverage of the subject. JavaHurricane 08:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Of course, there may be some coverage in offline sources too that I'm not aware of. Can someone try to find any offline coverage? JavaHurricane 08:23, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • And verily so. Striking, and thanks to Andrew for finding sources! Hope he can improve the page. JavaHurricane 16:59, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a toy from the 1970s, prior to the Internet. I'm not familiar with it myself but there's a reasonable account here. There's coverage in the trade press of the time such as Television/Radio Age and Toy & Hobby World. And now there is naturally retrospective coverage in sources such as Toys, Games, and Action Figure Collectibles of the 1970s; Cavalcade of Dolls and What's Real in Packaging? The worst case would be merger to Schaper Toys and so, per our policies WP:ATD and WP:PRESERVE, there is no case for deletion. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:03, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Andrew Davidson, Let's review the coverage:
      • Television/Radio Age - you did not provide a link and I failed to find anything that provides even a snippet view. WP:GOOGLEHITS "findings" are useless as they may be simple advertisements
      • Toy & Hobby World - No evidence of WP:SIGCOV in [1]. Snippet view gives us a half-sentence that reads " Company's prodbet manager , Mark Ellis , advises that Super Jock advertising...". Anyway, the identifiable subject is not the toy but its advertising campaign.
      • Toys, Games, and Action Figure Collectibles of the 1970s; 2 paragraphs that read like someone's personal review on an Internet forum and the book seems to be a self-published e-book (no ISBN, no WorldCat entry);
      • Cavalcade of Dolls and What's Real in Packaging? I can't even locate this source, since Andrew like usual didn't bother to provide links. Maybe it is a subtitle of the ebook mentioned above. Shrug. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Schaper Toys. Subject lacks SIGCOV, as Piotrus details above and no need to repeat. There is no properly sourced content for a merge from this article. If someone wishes to create properly sourced content and then add it to Schaper Toys they can, but there is none in the article or above.  // Timothy :: talk  03:24, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:59, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I checked all the issues of TV/Radio Age that World Radio History has and found no coverage. However, I do note that Superjock (no space), sometimes rendered Super Jock, would be a plausible redirect to Larry Lujack. There's also some coverage of a "Super Jock" mechanical horse racing jockey from 1987. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • World Radio History's run is incomplete. Television/Radio Age was bi-weekly but they only have one issue for 1976 which is when there was some coverage (Volume 23 page 82). Andrew🐉(talk) 10:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 20:13, 23 March 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Super_Jock&oldid=1015201586"