Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylan Taikato-Simpson

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 delete. Feel free to hash out a redirect now that he's red. Missvain (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan Taikato-Simpson[edit]

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

Player does not qualify for WP:NRU (Major League Rugby, Italian Super 10 and Romanian leagues are not notable leagues under WP:NRU), only brief mentions and news of the player signing for teams so does not qualify for WP:GNG either. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 21:01, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 21:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 21:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Seems to me to meet WP:GNG, as the sources are “substantial coverage”, viz. articles about Taikato-Simpson and not brief mentions. Moonraker (talk) 06:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Don't believe any of the sources on the page or that I can find are 'substantial coverage', that are independent of the source/tournament. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Moonraker, as has been discussed here can you show which of the sources in the article provide enough significant coverage for it to pass WP:GNG or if there are other sources that you believe enough to allow it to pass WP:GNG can you provide them. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 21:54, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Does not meet WP:GNG. Nothing but WP:ROUTINE transactions listing previous clubs lacking depth and brief mentions in match recaps. Yosemiter (talk) 16:32, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Yosemiter and nom Spiderone 21:40, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect No solid reason has been given to justify the deletion of this content while valid alternatives exist. If he is not worthy of a standalone article this can be redirected somewhere. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Duffbeerforme, please can you explain what the 'valid alternatives' would be, the player does not pass notability guidelines for rugby players at WP:NRU or general notability at WP:GNG. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Taikato-Simpson is mentioned in Old Glory DC, 2020 Major League Rugby season, List of 2019–20 Major League Rugby transfers. Pick the best target and redirect there. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are any of those redirects really suitable though? He's played for multiple clubs for a short period of time making a small number of appearances at all of them. The other two are a list page and the season page where he didn't win any awards or scored most points/tries or similar. Not sure any are suitable. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 13:56, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Which in part is why stand alone articles are useful. All this content is verifiable. He has been covered in the press. Original research is not required to build this page. What seems to be a current push to delete suche verifiable content seems misguided. Why delete when you can cover in other ways. Played just one game? include in a list. Played for lots of teams? Redirect to a list for the most prominent team, mention the others. Pick the best alternative but no need to delete. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:01, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Duffbeerforme: WP:V does not equal WP:N. Redirects are only suitable if the subject is actually discussed or mentioned on that page. If there are multiple possible targets for redirection, then it is not suitable for redirect per WP:XY. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of stats or roster transactions, verifiable or not. The subject must have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Yosemiter (talk) 14:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I never said WP:V equals WP:N. "The subject must have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." (Tell yhat to the advocates of wp:prof.) To have a standalone article it is best to The subject must have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. But the way you've said it seems to sufggest you think GNG overrides the SNGs. That is not the case. Directly qouting from the primary notability guide, "It meets either the general notability guideline below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline listed in the box on the right;". Note Or'. It gives no precedence to gng. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The SNG for this person is WP:NRU as he is a rugby union player. He fails that notability, as mentioned in the nomination. He fails both WP:SNG and WP:GNG. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 14:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your point being? Read what I'm actually saying. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:28, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is not suitable redirect for this player due to WP:XY and the person fails both WP:SNG and WP:GNG meaning he is not notable enough for a Wikipedia article. I'm not entirely sure what your other argument is as he's not an academic. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 14:30, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He has played more games for Colorado Raptors than any other so a List of Raptors players article would be the best target. If it doesn't yet exist then a redirect to the team seem sensible pending the creation of a list article. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:47, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The page doesn't exist, plus there's no indication that statement will remain true as he's left the team and the team no longer exists. He could make more appearances for another team in the future. Readers searching for Dylan Taikato-Simpson could be searching for anything (such as his spell in Italy or playing for the Australian Barbarians) so WP:XY is in effect here. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 14:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Duffbeerforme: There actually is a current discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability#SNG change about SNG vs GNG. But the short of it is: 8 out of 10 SNGs are written to in order meet GNG, including WP:NSPORTS (from NSPORTS: All information included in Wikipedia, including articles about sports, must be verifiable. In addition, the subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline). So yes, GNG outweighs the SNG for this subject right now. Yosemiter (talk) 14:32, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An ongoing discussion May change things but hasn't yet. NSPORT says "The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below." OR. No overriding there. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't take away from the fact that the player does not meet WP:SNG (under WP:NRU in this case as he's a rugby union player), or WP:GNG, why should this page be kept if he doesn't meet any of these notability requirements? Rugbyfan22 (talk) 14:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Duffbeerforme: What I quoted is from Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Applicable policies and guidelines and then further explained in Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Basic criteria, which both expand on the brief intro you are pointing to. As to the ongoing discussion, it it mostly about making the phrasing in WP:N so SNGs should meet GNG, with some exceptions. No one is advocating for NSPORTS to be one of those exceptions, in fact, many think it should be more strict to GNG. Yosemiter (talk) 14:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Duffbeerforme: Also, you keep pointing to the OR in that sentence. This subject does NOT meet any of the SNGs, so GNG is the OR it needs to meet anyways. Yosemiter (talk) 16:03, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ 01:13, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there is no significant coverage of this player, and I strongly disagree any alternatives to deletion exist here, as there's no blurb on him anywhere else on this website. SportingFlyer T·C 13:25, 28 November 2020 (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.