Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darius Leonard

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:23, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Darius Leonard

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats
)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't meet

π, ν) 06:08, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 06:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 06:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 06:31, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete and userfy, and then bring back if he makes the NFL. "Serious consideration for the draft" is not the threshold of notability for college football players. The coverage I have found seems to be a few local news mentions and blog discussions, but that's not enough to pass
    WP:GNG or any other notability measure I can think of. He's probably going to get drafted, he's probably going to play in the NFL, and then he would be a clear pass for notability at that point... but that's two "probably" hurdles which means he hasn't done that yet and no subject achieves notability for what they haven't done yet. If significant sources can be found for his current achievements (such as his college career) I'd be willing to change my position, but I was unable to find that level of coverage. Other editors may be successful at that.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
@Paulmcdonald: There is a good deal of significant coverage. See below. Cbl62 (talk) 01:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to Keep Cbl62 is great at research! The AP pickup adds weight to the extensive regional coverage which passes
WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:43, 7 March 2018 (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.