Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott McKinley

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 speedy keep. If a rationale is required, then passing WP:NOLYMPICS in spades applies; the possibility of WP:SKCRIT#2 or #3 may also be also relevant, but is for discussion elsewhere. (non-admin closure) —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap shit room} 16:44, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scott McKinley[edit]

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

not notable Makro (talk) 19:00, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:49, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:49, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep First, he competed at the Olympics, passing WP:NOLY. Second, he's won lots of races, per his bios on Cycling Archives and ProCyclingStats. And third, there's press coverage in the NY Times and LA Times, for starters. See also WP:BEFORE. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:25, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If that is the case then why not include it I the article. All it consists of is on sentence and one reference. More is needed to prove notability. Makro (talk) 12:16, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- - Speedy keep and comment Clearly passes WP:NOLY so this AFD should be a quick close. @Makro: could help things out by withdrawing his misguided nomination and even worse defense of it which is misleading. The article is two sentences not one and how that can be missed I don't know except possibly this editor is again being disruptive[1]....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:40, 1 April 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.