Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yulia Putintseva

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. Closing as "keep" because there is a consensus that the subject passes WP:GNG and the fact that one of the "delete" !voters is conceding that she may barely pass WP:NTENNIS. Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yulia Putintseva[edit]

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

Fails Tennis notabilty as per here KnowIG (talk) 14:40, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails notability criteria for tennis players. Junior player, who hasn't won a Grand Slam and wasn't in the top 3 of the rankings. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 15:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep she is currently in the top 10 [1]? She was at the finals of the US Open in 2010. So keep.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 17:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a valid reason to keep. She fails notablity as she hasn't won a gs and has not been ranked in the top 3 of juniors KnowIG (talk) 18:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as indicated by the nominator, she fails WP:NTENNIS Mayumashu (talk) 15:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes WP:TENNIS/N 3rd criteria since she has competed in the main draw in one of the major professional tournaments: WTA International (2010 BGL Luxembourg Open – Singles) Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 16:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yes, she may technically pass WP:TENNIS/N even if just barely. However the Luxembourg tournament is certainly not the world's most important one and she lost in the first round. Since that seems to be her only participation in a senior tournament she's not really notable yet. She may well become so in the future but at the moment this isn't really someone who is guaranteed to have sustained long-term notability. Travelbird (talk) 09:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 14:34, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. After reevaluating this and taking another look at the topic, it does indeed appear to pass WP:NOTE - that is, has been the subject of significant coverage from multiple reliable secondary sources that are verifiable. This includes archived news articles, as well as more recent coverage - in multiple different languages. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 14:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notwithstanding the "scholarly" debate above about whether she is important, multiple reliable secondary sources that are verifiable have seen fit to provide significant coverage about the subject. What would become of a Wikipedia that put its article inclusion decision making above the decisions by reliable sources? Wikipedia would become nothing more than just another website on the web. Cirt has it right. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 16:03, 20 February 2011 (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.