Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tziarra King

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. Fenix down (talk) 12:26, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tziarra King

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Govvy (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Govvy (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Govvy (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: Clearly meets WP:NFOOTY by having played in the NWSL. A quick Google search shows GNG as well. Seany91 (talk) 19:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question I didn't think qualification rounds passed NFooty, :/ Govvy (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Not sure what you're referring to. What qualification rounds? Seany91 (talk) 19:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a person who only played in one game does not pass any reasonable notability criteria, if there is a criteria she passes it should be scapped because it is absurd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- You mean this reasonable notability criterion? Seany91 (talk) 22:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:TOOSOON Davidstewartharvey (talk) 20:43, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Based on what criteria? Seany91 (talk) 22:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CommentIt is based on that 1.The NWSL Challenge Cup is not a professional league as per WP:NFOOTBALL#2, it is a pre-season tournament (it does not appear on the wikipedia list. I have said this rule is wrong as the women's game is mostly semi pro). 2.WP:NSPORTQ7 says that A7: Routine news coverage of sporting events, such as descriptions of what occurred, is not considered to be sufficient basis for an article, following Wikipedia's policy of not being a place for routine news coverage. There should be significant coverage directly related to the subject. In addition to Wikipedia's guidance on reliable sources, also see Wikipedia's guidance on biographies of living persons for more information which means the march report is routine. This leaves the draft reference only, which is not multiple refs which it quotes in WP:NSPORT Q5: The second sentence in the guideline says "The article must provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline or the sport specific criteria set forth below." Does this mean that the general notability guideline doesn't have to be met? A5: No; as per Q1 and Q2, eventually sources must be provided showing that the general notability guideline is met. This sentence is just emphasizing that the article must always cite reliable sources to support a claim of meeting Wikipedia's notability standards, whether it is the criteria set by the sports-specific notability guidelines, or the general notability guideline.[5]. That is why it's WP:TOOSOON. It could be moved to drafty until she becomes notable, as she has only just started her career. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 05:55, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're deliberately misinterpreting the language in WP:NFOOTY, and the 2020 NWSL Challenge Cup is not a preseason tournament. Utah Royals FC and Houston Dash are NWSL teams that just played a competitive match; NWSL is a fully professional league (see WP:FPL). Therefore, NFOOTY is satisfied. No one is saying that the article doesn't need to be improved from a stub, but WP:GNG is an inherent quality and in this case the next step is to improve the article by adding prose and sources, not to delete it. Seany91 (talk) 12:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep First of all, does meet WP:NFOOTY through the appearance in the NWSL Challenge Cup. Secondly, there's plenty of coverage to meet WP:GNG. See [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] – these encompass significant, reliable, independent secondary sources. There's also plenty of more routine coverage around her goal today, being drafted, etc. to write meaningful prose. Keskkonnakaitse (talk) 21:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep page passes WP:NFOOTY as she has played in a competitive game between two teams from fully professional leagues Joeykai (talk) 21:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NFOOTY plus all of the reliable and verifiable sources about her that satisfy the notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 02:56, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NFOOTY Carter (talk) 16:35, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep easily passes NFOOTY. She got her first professional appearance in the season opener only yesterday, where she came in at the 70th minute, and scored a goal in the 89th to tie the game (which not surprisingly is getting media coverage). How is this tournament any different than the MLS is Back Tournament? We've long held that people should hold off creating articles for players until they get their first fully-professional appearance. How is this not that? Perhaps User:Govvy is not aware of the status of the 2020 season - could the nomination be withdrawn? Nfitz (talk) 22:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep as she's made a professional appearance, and OP was apparently just a little confused about the NWSL cup. Seany is completely right, NFOOTY is completely satisfied. Nole (chat·edits) 03:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets NFOOTBALL, and plenty of sources out there for improvement/expansion. Notable. Giant Snowman 17:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Dutchy45 (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:35, 3 July 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.