Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W Watson

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 redirect to New South Wales Rugby League. I'm going with redirect here based on the point made by User:RandomCanadian. Feel free to change the redirect location if needed. Missvain (talk) 16:03, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

W Watson

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

W Watson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:GNG, possibly redirect to any Eastern Suburbs player lists, if one exists. SportingFlyer T·C 12:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 12:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. SportingFlyer T·C 12:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CommanderWaterford (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. Meets notability per WP:RLN since he played in NSWRL, which is the precursor to the National Rugby League. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 14:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
• Delete This article totally and completely fails GNG. That needs to be how we jusge these things. This notion that later league notability means anyone who ever played in any iteration of the league is notable is just leading to us creating articles on people who were not in the public spotlight. We really should reconsider a lot of our sports notability guidelines, because they lead to a huge mess of articles on people who were in no way notable. The first big recondiseration we need to do is scrap the notion everyone who was even in the olympics is default notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Run n Fly (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. Meets WP:RLN. Doctorhawkes (talk) 06:39, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
• WP:NSPORT clearly says all biographies must ultimately meet GNG - merely passing a SNG isn't enough. Are there any sources on this guy? SportingFlyer T·C 09:54, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Being bold with a third relist out of curiosity regarding what User:SportingFlyer just said. In some AfDs, I see sports editors saying the WP:NSPORTS guidelines are virtually obsolete and useless, and others saying they still matter.

Remember, WP:GNG supercedes every niche notability guideline.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. Of course RLN doesn't supersede GNG, per the explicit wording in NSPORT:

  Q1: How is this guideline related to the general notability guideline?
  A1: The topic-specific notability guidelines described on this page do not replace the general notability guideline.

  and

  Q2: If a sports figure meets the criteria specified in a sports-specific notability guideline, does this mean he/she does not have to meet the general notability guideline?
  A2: No, the article must still eventually provide sources indicating that the subject meets the general notability guideline. Although the criteria for a given sport should be chosen to be a very reliable predictor of the availability of appropriate secondary coverage from reliable sources, there can be exceptions.

  and

  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.

  That he meets Rugby wikiproject notability criteria but hasn't garnered any SIGCOV just indicates RLN is not a good predictor of GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 22:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect to an appropriate list article as an appropriate WP:ATD for a plausible search term. AfDs shouldn't be the forum for resolving the tensions between poor SNGs and the GNG. SNG needs to be updated. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 11:30, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

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.