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 - you don't get to the World Aquatics Championships without achieving an unusual level of talent and this should be taken into account.
Deb (
talk)
18:57, 3 August 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NSPORTS2022 deprecated participation-based presumptions of SIGCOV for sports subguidelines, in addition to removing all presumption of notability. Therefore, merely participating at the World Aquatics Championships does not even indicate that SIGCOV exists, let alone presume notability. On top of that, all athletes must have at least one source of SIGCOV cited in their articles for any of the SSGs or SPORTBASIC presumptions to apply, so even medalling at WAC wouldn't be a valid predictor of further coverage here.
JoelleJay (
talk)
19:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. I don’t believe that competing at the championships by itself is sufficient to Mt our notability standards. That would usher in many many hundreds of non notable individuals. Is someone thinks otherwise they can seek to revise our sports specific notability standard.
2603:7000:2143:8500:9CB2:BE71:9E3A:24FF (
talk)
07:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails
WP:GNG due to lack of independent sources with in-depth coverage. Also fails
WP:SPORTBASIC which states: "Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources." The first three sources are database sources. The fourth (the Jordanian Olympic Committee) is not an independent source and lacks depth (7 words on Aklouk).
Cbl62 (
talk)
13:18, 12 August 2022 (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 - you don't get to the World Aquatics Championships without achieving an unusual level of talent and this should be taken into account.
Deb (
talk)
18:57, 3 August 2022 (UTC)reply
WP:NSPORTS2022 deprecated participation-based presumptions of SIGCOV for sports subguidelines, in addition to removing all presumption of notability. Therefore, merely participating at the World Aquatics Championships does not even indicate that SIGCOV exists, let alone presume notability. On top of that, all athletes must have at least one source of SIGCOV cited in their articles for any of the SSGs or SPORTBASIC presumptions to apply, so even medalling at WAC wouldn't be a valid predictor of further coverage here.
JoelleJay (
talk)
19:51, 6 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. I don’t believe that competing at the championships by itself is sufficient to Mt our notability standards. That would usher in many many hundreds of non notable individuals. Is someone thinks otherwise they can seek to revise our sports specific notability standard.
2603:7000:2143:8500:9CB2:BE71:9E3A:24FF (
talk)
07:14, 4 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails
WP:GNG due to lack of independent sources with in-depth coverage. Also fails
WP:SPORTBASIC which states: "Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources." The first three sources are database sources. The fourth (the Jordanian Olympic Committee) is not an independent source and lacks depth (7 words on Aklouk).
Cbl62 (
talk)
13:18, 12 August 2022 (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.