Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Barnes (coach)

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 keep. After new sources were introduced, two delete !votes switched to keep, and all !votes that came in after relisting were keep votes. Consensus is that new sources listed here demonstrate that the subject meets the GNG, and should be added to the article. (non-admin closure) Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 16:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Barnes (coach)[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)

Rank-and-file football coach, nothing to suggest notability, fails WP:GNG / WP:NCOLLATH -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable low level assistant football coach.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:29, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - meets neither WP:GNG or WP:NCOLLATH. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Onel5969. Sourcing in article currently is not independent, and my searches don't reveal significant coverage in reliable, independent sources required to pass under WP:GNG. I have open mind if others' turn up such coverage. Cbl62 (talk) 18:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NCOLLATH, per all above. Ejgreen77 (talk) 15:15, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ejgreen77: Would appreciate your taking a second look based on the new coverage brought forward below. Thanks. Cbl62 (talk) 19:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A coordinator for one of the biggest college football programs in the country. Notable enough that Coach Barnes is included in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_coaches . As a football coach, I can absolutely confirm that this is a worth while article, and I will also work to improve that article when I get a little more time. I had actually already started to create it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbowers77 (talk • contribs) 01:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to turn this AfD around, you will need to come up with some examples of significant coverage in reliable independent publications. Without that, this one is headed strongly to deletion. Cbl62 (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A couple examples: https://www.si.com/college/ohiostate/football/matt-barnes-values-relationships-to-be-effective , https://247sports.com/college/ohio-state/Article/Ohio-State-Buckeyes-football-Matt-Barnes-hybrid-of-the-coaching-staff-one-on-one-interview-special-teams-defensive-backs-130580532/ , https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football-recruiting/2020/05/114282/matt-barnes-has-worked-his-way-up-quickly-from-the-lower-levels-of-college-football-coaching-to-become — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbowers77 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the elevenwarriors source is reliable, it looks like an indie sports blog. The other two pieces are primarily interviews, and, while reliable, don't really add much from a WP:GNG standpoint. We need sources discussing him, not interviewing him. Hog Farm _Talk 06:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The SI.com piece clearly represents significant coverage in a reliable source. I respectfully but absolutely disagree with HogFarm that it doesn't add much from a GNG standpoint; the fact that this feature article on Barnes includes quotes from the subject is ordinary journalistic practice and does not in any way, shape or form undermine its qualification as significant coverage. That said, I do agree with HogFarm in questioning whether elevenwarriors.com is a reliable source. If you can come up with other significant coverage in reliable, independent sources (such as the Columbus Dispatch or Baltimore Sun), I, and perhaps others, could be persuaded to change to "Keep". Cbl62 (talk) 07:49, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbowers77: Actually, here is another feature story from a major newspaper. Getting close to flipping to a Keep vote. Ping me if you are able to find anything else. Cbl62 (talk) 08:03, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

this has some coverage. After a reread, I have to change my statement about the SI piece, as it does include some significant non-interview coverage in places. And some more here. Hog Farm _Talk 15:27, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbl62: - I'm not Cbowers77, but I'll ping you for the new sources I found. The Frederick News Post isn't the strongest source, but the Chicago Tribune is pretty good, IMO. Hog Farm _Talk 15:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I was trying to ping the person who made the unsigned comments and believe, based on page history, that person to be Cbowers77. Cbl62 (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Between the Baltimore Sun, SI, and Chicago Tribune pieces, I think there's enough here for notability. Hog Farm _Talk 15:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Switching to keep per WP:GNG and WP:NCOLLATH (prong 3) and significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources, including (1) this from The Baltimore Sun; (2) this from Sports Illustrated; (3) this from the Frederick Post, (4) this from the Clevelenad Plain Dealer, and (5) this from The Washington Post. Nice work by Cbowers77 and User:Hog Farm in bringing the necessary coverage to the discussion. Cbl62 (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep per additional sources discovered above. Ejgreen77 (talk) 11:47, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
keep appears to pass WP:GNG from sources found during this discussion.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:30, 27 January 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.