Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marwood Marchant

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. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:53, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Marwood Marchant

Marwood Marchant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails

• Speedy keep But appears to pass
  WP:FOOTBALL.TheLongTone (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • How? I couldn't find anything to establish notability. Adam9007 (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Playing for Cardiff City.TheLongTone (talk) 15:21, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then you wouldn't mind adding some sources to corroborate notability? Adam9007 (talk) 15:22, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Regardless of notability, I can't
  verify the existence of Marchant. Probably the best bet for doing that would be the archives of the South Wales Echo from ~1949-51 (when he seems to have been active, according to our article here). Unfortunately, I don't have access to those, and the Times and Sunday Times archives I do have access to don't turn up anything from searching... Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:23, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete Does not deserve an article since no verifiable sources pop up on a simple google search.--Account2235 (talk) 20:18, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right. If you can'r google it, it does not exist. I've added a couple of refs. Since I think that football is one of the least interesting things on this or any other planet I've no idea how reliable they are.TheLongTone (talk) 15:15, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep I've added some references and a basic infobox to cleanup the article somewhat. Definitely passes
  WP:FOOTBALL. Kosack (talk) 12:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:33, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep Clearly passes
  the Football League. Number 57 12:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy keep Subject played for several years and two different teams in
  subject-specific notability guideline. This brings with it a presumption of general notability.

  Although I'm not surprised that a basic Google search doesn't provide clear evidence of significant coverage in independent reliable sources of a person whose notable career ended more than 60 years ago, I am surprised that some of you failed to find evidence of Mr Marchant's existence: all three web references currently present in the article come from the first 17 results of the Google search linked above. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Keep Per above passes
  WP:NFOOTBALL.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep Subject satisfies
  WP:NFOOTBALL. What are we to gain by deleting articles that satisfy our subject specific criteria? Mattythewhite (talk) 21:51, 14 May 2016 (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.