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 delete. Consensus is clear at this time that this topic constitutes a
non-encyclopaedic cross-categorization, has elements of original research, and may be in violation of BLP policies.
WP:SNOW close at this time. North America1000 14:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)reply
It could be a good trivia bit and good for a
WP:DYK on the main page, but from the vibe I'm getting, this fact probably belongs better on his page, provided there is verification.--
WuTang94 (
talk) 17:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Of course if there are inaccuracies the viable option is to
WP:FIXIT rather than delete the article.
Bus stop (
talk) 17:00, 18 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom.
Kolma8 (
talk) 19:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete There is nothing really useful about this list.
JayJayWhat did I do? 19:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete This is an irregular grouping, all the more so since some of the people on this list have white ancestry (and a few may have black ancestry as well). Some of these people have very complex ancestry. Anyway, I do not think many people like seeing their Hispanic/Pacific Islander/Asian ancestry grouped as "non-White, non-Black". Especially since on a world scale Hispanic/Asian/Pacific Islanders far outnumber blacks and white combined.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Good point. Deciding what to name this article was a very awkward process to begin with. My sincerest apologies if this has offended anyone.--
WuTang94 (
talk) 23:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete agreed that its largely uncited.
Peter303x (
talk) 21:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
As the creator of this list, there was better sourcing at the beginning (even if it was just a select number of sources), but eventually, it evolved into a mostly unsourced list after further edits by other users. It's probably too tedious to go back and source every quarterback at this point so I'm fine with this list being huffed. It's also just a "nice to have" list, but can go if it doesn't provide much real value and if most users want it gone. Maybe quarterbacks such as
Tom Flores (first Latino QB in NFL) and
Roman Gabriel (first Asian QB in NFL) could have side notes on their own individual pages if it's not there already, as there should be verified sources on them.--
WuTang94 (
talk) 23:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Just because something can be verified doesn't mean it's automatically notable.
Clarityfiend (
talk) 07:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete as a non-notable cross categorisation.
Ajf773 (
talk) 23:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails
WP:LISTN as the grouping is not discussed enough in reliable sources.—
Bagumba (
talk) 09:52, 20 January 2021 (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.
The result was delete. Consensus is clear at this time that this topic constitutes a
non-encyclopaedic cross-categorization, has elements of original research, and may be in violation of BLP policies.
WP:SNOW close at this time. North America1000 14:41, 22 January 2021 (UTC)reply
It could be a good trivia bit and good for a
WP:DYK on the main page, but from the vibe I'm getting, this fact probably belongs better on his page, provided there is verification.--
WuTang94 (
talk) 17:32, 16 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Of course if there are inaccuracies the viable option is to
WP:FIXIT rather than delete the article.
Bus stop (
talk) 17:00, 18 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom.
Kolma8 (
talk) 19:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete There is nothing really useful about this list.
JayJayWhat did I do? 19:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete This is an irregular grouping, all the more so since some of the people on this list have white ancestry (and a few may have black ancestry as well). Some of these people have very complex ancestry. Anyway, I do not think many people like seeing their Hispanic/Pacific Islander/Asian ancestry grouped as "non-White, non-Black". Especially since on a world scale Hispanic/Asian/Pacific Islanders far outnumber blacks and white combined.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 20:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Good point. Deciding what to name this article was a very awkward process to begin with. My sincerest apologies if this has offended anyone.--
WuTang94 (
talk) 23:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete agreed that its largely uncited.
Peter303x (
talk) 21:18, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
As the creator of this list, there was better sourcing at the beginning (even if it was just a select number of sources), but eventually, it evolved into a mostly unsourced list after further edits by other users. It's probably too tedious to go back and source every quarterback at this point so I'm fine with this list being huffed. It's also just a "nice to have" list, but can go if it doesn't provide much real value and if most users want it gone. Maybe quarterbacks such as
Tom Flores (first Latino QB in NFL) and
Roman Gabriel (first Asian QB in NFL) could have side notes on their own individual pages if it's not there already, as there should be verified sources on them.--
WuTang94 (
talk) 23:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Just because something can be verified doesn't mean it's automatically notable.
Clarityfiend (
talk) 07:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete as a non-notable cross categorisation.
Ajf773 (
talk) 23:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails
WP:LISTN as the grouping is not discussed enough in reliable sources.—
Bagumba (
talk) 09:52, 20 January 2021 (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.