Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeke Upshaw

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. Snow. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 18:37, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zeke Upshaw[edit]

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

Was created after death, and posted at ITN (where it was rejected - [1]). Appears to fail WP:NBASKETBALL. Black Kite (talk) 22:07, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I spent some time during the ITNC discussion looking for pre-death coverage and unfortunately came up rather short. Most of what I came across was run of the mill, bordering on trivial and insufficient to ring the WP:N bell via WP:BASIC or NBASKETBALL. Significant coverage does not appear to begin until after the subjects untimely death which places it under the heading of BLP1E. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral Striking my oppose out of deference to clear consensus. This can probably be closed early w/o controversy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:GNG with multiple sources of significant coverage cited, including many before the recent death coverage. They are not routine, planned coverage of games, but rather articles with Upshaw as the main subject and in the title. Moreover, not meeting an SNG is not a reason to delete. Per WP:NSPORTS: "Subjects that do not meet the sport-specific criteria outlined in this guideline may still be notable if they meet the General Notability Guideline ..." Pro athletes that die while competing will undoubtedly be referenced in the future. The timing of the article's creation and its ITN status are red herrings.—Bagumba (talk) 22:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Changed my mind, as the article is evolving (with more details about his life and career being added). Delete Fails condition 3 of WP:NBASKETBALL (no award, no lead in a major statistical category). The timing of the article's creation is clearly no coincidence. Pre-death news coverage is limited, and career highlight is from 2014. Example of recentism: the death of an athlete does not make the athlete notable. If the death is considered the only notable event then the article could be moved to Death of Zeke Upshaw. --Renerpho (talk) 23:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. —Bagumba (talk) 22:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Bagumba's rationale. Upshaw technically fails all 3 of NBASKETBALL's guidelines. In saying that, Upshaw played in the top league in Slovenia in 2014/15, then in Luxembourg's top league in 2015/16. Luxembourg is nothing to ride home about, but Slovenia's league is up there with the best in Europe. GNG clearly supersedes NBASKETBALL here. There is plenty of good coverage from his college days, and a bit more digging can easily expand his professional career section. Google searches are obviously saturated with sources from the past few days, but it's not difficult to find sources from pre-death. DaHuzyBru (talk) 03:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 05:31, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - Per Bagumba's rationale. GNG trumps NBASKETBALL in this case in my opinion.BabbaQ (talk) 09:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:GNG. Rikster2 (talk) 10:01, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sufficient sourcing to pass WP:GNG. --Jayron 32 12:41, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or possibly rename "Death of Zeke Upshaw"--TM 13:39, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources are present to pass GNG. Upshaw is notable for his life, not his death. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 13:46, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely Keep – The article has been updated to where it talks about his life more thoroughly with sources to back it up as well. And much like Rikster2 and Eddy before me mentioned, it does pass the general notability features that Wikipedia requires for articles like this. So I say keep it as is and don't rename it just off of the surprise death of a player. I mean, we don't do that for people like Len Bias or Reggie Lewis, now do we? (Yes, I know they were both prominent players before their sudden deaths, but that's beside the point.) – AGreatPhoenixSunsFan (talk) 00:06, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Easily meets WP:GNG. -- Dane ^talk 02:56, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Upshaw was the subject of several substantial news articles in the years before he died. He led an NCAA Division 1 conference in scoring, which is a good foundation for notability. Zagalejo^^^ 04:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Satisfies WP:GNG and as long as we can keep the article focused on his career not his tragic death, he's deserving of an article.--Rockchalk7 17 12:57, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:GNG.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:44, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep clearly passes GNG. GuzzyG (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Easily meets GNG. SNOW close. Calm Omaha (talk) 17:51, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG, per all above. Ejgreen77 (talk) 05:51, 2 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.