Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oscar Andrade

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. Sandstein 19:13, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar Andrade[edit]

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

Non-notable boxer - des not meet WP:NBOX Peter Rehse (talk) 10:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 10:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not notable. Kierzek (talk) 12:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NBOX and lacks the coverage for WP:GNG. Mdtemp (talk) 18:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ramón Valadez for now maybe at least until a better article can be made and he may be closest linked to that fight. SwisterTwister talk 06:49, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That would be an unusual precedent for boxers and flies in the face of common sense. Do we redirect all non-notable boxers that fought someone with an article to that article and since they fought more than one - to which article. The point is potentially moot since Valadez is not particularly notable himself and I will PROD it. Peter Rehse (talk) 08:29, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:45, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:45, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't meet the notability criteria for boxers and lacks the significant independent coverage needed for WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet WP:NBOX and does not have significant news coverage. Way too early for this article. Charlie the Pig (talk) 02:34, 16 October 2015 (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.