Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony DeNiro (2nd nomination)

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:05, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tony DeNiro[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unremarkable subject; Google search yields no reliable results about the article's subject. lovkal (talk) 12:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did find this L.A Weekly article: http://www.laweekly.com/music/the-faze-made-an-album-using-the-beats-from-liquid-swords-and-people-are-freaking-out-8346462 although it only mentions DeNiro briefly. lovkal (talk) 12:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, the article does not seem to have improved since the previous deletion nomination, it has even deteriorated. lovkal (talk) 12:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:NBIO. Kirbanzo (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 00:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. SPA editor recreation of a promotional article deleted per first AfD nomination. The original article was full of peacock language and unverifiable information that, once edited out, leaves very little. One finds numerous hits by googling his name, but all are result of an apparent aggressive effort to create a promotional on-line presence (numerous user download-type sites.) The few examples of genuine third party coverage are tangential, trivial, run-of-the-mill (such as related to his sports career) and small time. Nothing that I could find shows the necessary significant third party coverage that conveys this subject is of encyclopedic importance. ShelbyMarion (talk) 15:09, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 22:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Most the coverage I found was about his football career when he was called "Tony Smith". Sources: [1] From nl.newsbank.com, The Kansas City Star ("Chiefs report", August 18, 1992, "Chiefs report", August 26, 1992 - "Chiefs' pick covets notice Wide receiver fell in Rocket's shadow but gained valuable lessons.", 1992), Post-Tribune ("SMITH HOPES TO BE IRISH STARTER", 1990 - "SMITH LOOKS TO BE ONE OF MIRER'S TOP IRISH TARGETS", 1991 - "SMITH CATCHES 2 PASSES DESPITE HAMSTRING INJURY", 1991 - "SMITH LIKES HIS NFL CHANCES", 1992), The News-Sentinel ("IRISH RECEIVER READY TO FILL BIG-PLAY SHOES", 1991) WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 23:13, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

His college football career received typical sports pages run-of-the-mill coverage but fails to meet WP:NCOLLATH standards. Although drafted into professional sports (which likewise garnered typical sports page run-of-the-mill coverage), he never started a game, and fails WP:GRIDIRON. ShelbyMarion (talk) 13:15, 24 January 2018 (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.