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.
Keep head football coaches of college-level programs are typically kept because they generate more than enough press to cover
WP:GNG. I see no reason to make an excpetion here.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
20:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Paulmcdonald, Yes, there's 15 in the article. I looked at each one. None of them struck me as independent, reliable, secondary sources providing significant coverage. Of the three you present here, the first is an article written by the subject. The second is local coverage of the fact that he was hired. There's a bunch of those in the article now. I'd be more impressed if some newspaper outside of Virginia covered the event. And the third is a namedrop in an article about he game he coached; it's not about him, specifically. --
RoySmith(talk)16:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)reply
I am unaware of any notabiltiy standard, guideline, or rule that sets the bar at "impressing any individual editor" as the breakpoint for inclusion.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
18:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Certainly does not meet
WP:NFOOTBALL. Looking up "Alvin Parker coach" on the web raises several hits, but multiple are from only two websites, and many are about his admission as a coach of the Virginia University team, that is, they are largely WP:ROUTINE routine (i.e., not significant coverage). To meet
WP:BIO, I'd want to see more coverage on his achievements as a coach, rather than mere announcements. Especially considering that he coaches a non-notable team. Walwal20talk ▾
contribs22:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Don't break any rules! But that does leave an interesting impass here... can the outcome of whatever is going on "over there" end up managing the results of this article? But even if it was written by a sock, that alone would not be reason to delete if the article itself passes muster. In other words, we're not discussing the original author's account, or the article?--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
20:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, per MER-C and per nom. None of the sources indicate that he meets the standard required by
WP:N, which looks for "sufficiently significant attention by the world at large" - ie, coverage outside the subject's local area. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)20:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete the kind of sourcing that a typical DII coach gets, and Parker is on the whole an unremarkable DII coach, is simply not going to be the kind that establishes notability. Best,
Barkeep49 (
talk)
03:43, 12 October 2020 (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.
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.
Keep head football coaches of college-level programs are typically kept because they generate more than enough press to cover
WP:GNG. I see no reason to make an excpetion here.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
20:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Paulmcdonald, Yes, there's 15 in the article. I looked at each one. None of them struck me as independent, reliable, secondary sources providing significant coverage. Of the three you present here, the first is an article written by the subject. The second is local coverage of the fact that he was hired. There's a bunch of those in the article now. I'd be more impressed if some newspaper outside of Virginia covered the event. And the third is a namedrop in an article about he game he coached; it's not about him, specifically. --
RoySmith(talk)16:06, 5 October 2020 (UTC)reply
I am unaware of any notabiltiy standard, guideline, or rule that sets the bar at "impressing any individual editor" as the breakpoint for inclusion.--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
18:52, 5 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Certainly does not meet
WP:NFOOTBALL. Looking up "Alvin Parker coach" on the web raises several hits, but multiple are from only two websites, and many are about his admission as a coach of the Virginia University team, that is, they are largely WP:ROUTINE routine (i.e., not significant coverage). To meet
WP:BIO, I'd want to see more coverage on his achievements as a coach, rather than mere announcements. Especially considering that he coaches a non-notable team. Walwal20talk ▾
contribs22:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Don't break any rules! But that does leave an interesting impass here... can the outcome of whatever is going on "over there" end up managing the results of this article? But even if it was written by a sock, that alone would not be reason to delete if the article itself passes muster. In other words, we're not discussing the original author's account, or the article?--
Paul McDonald (
talk)
20:20, 11 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete, per MER-C and per nom. None of the sources indicate that he meets the standard required by
WP:N, which looks for "sufficiently significant attention by the world at large" - ie, coverage outside the subject's local area. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)20:55, 11 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete the kind of sourcing that a typical DII coach gets, and Parker is on the whole an unremarkable DII coach, is simply not going to be the kind that establishes notability. Best,
Barkeep49 (
talk)
03:43, 12 October 2020 (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.