Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marquez Branson

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marquez Branson[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)

Non-notable football player. Never actually played in the NFL, can't find anything in newspapers.com outside of basic transactions and a handful of game recaps, does not appear to pass WP:GNG. Wizardman 14:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, with the sources added my stance is a neutral one, I don't feel comfortable saying outright keep or delete. Wizardman 22:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. Wizardman 14:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mississippi-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Concur with the nom, unable to find any WP:SIGCOV for this subject to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 16:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes GNG [1][2][3][4][5][6] ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of that (2 3 and 4) is run of the mill reports, but the first and last (5/6) one might be enough. I'll wait and see how others feel. Wizardman 22:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think we have enough in sources offered for WP:BASIC. Lightburst (talk) 18:05, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The first source listed above is based almost entirely on quotes, the last is also interview-heavy and lacks depth. Both are from spring/summer 2010, so fail SUSTAINED. This article is basically sourced to local mentions of his college play and hype that didn't materialize, which is not sufficient.

JoelleJay (talk) 18:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. SUSTAINED only appears to discount biographical articles when they are only discussed significantly "in the context of a single event" – as we've got in-depth Denver Post articles from May and August, as well as an in-depth Associated Press feature from July, each of which are not accurately described as "entirely quotes" – we have enough for a pass of WP:GNG, despite it being weak. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reference to BLP1E regards whether to create a bio vs an event article, not simply notability, but anyway both pieces of coverage are on his practice squad activity which is one context. And I said based on quotes. JoelleJay (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A three-year practice squad stint ≠ "one event"; that's similar to saying that a "football career is one event" – now, if the only coverage was two stories on "Branson signed to practice squad" from the same approximate date, then I would agree with you. However, this is sigcov across four months from different major outlets, which is not accurately characterized IMO as "entirely based on quotes" – that is enough for a pass of GNG in my opinion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're both pieces on the team's hype of Branson as a potential replacement for Scheffler, regurgitating some of the same quotes, with almost nothing of substance to say on him. Also the May 19 piece says he's "off the practice squad" now, the July 31 piece claims he's on the practice squad, so what's that about. JoelleJay (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three relists is kinda ridiculous I mean I'll withdraw my stance if this gets this closed. Wizardman 02:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered the evidence that the subject only received coverage over a four-month span, on the same topics, and so fails SUSTAINED? JoelleJay (talk) 08:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not enough for a biography. Mentioning his name in the three season articles (see What links here) seems more than enough. Geschichte (talk) 10:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per JoelleJay's reasoning. Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the references provided by WikiOriginal-9. While the first four are more-or-less routine, the last two add enough SIGCOV to barely get Mr. Branson past WP:GNG. Passes WP:SUSTAINED as articles presented encompass a several-month window in 2010. Frank Anchor 15:57, 28 February 2024 (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.