Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Bellingham

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Enrico Manni (talk | contribs) at 00:26, 6 July 2023 (→‎Rebecca Bellingham). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Rebecca Bellingham

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

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

Fails GNG and SNG. Achievements are insignificant; no coverage found online. Timothytyy (talk) 08:10, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Paora Florentyna Notability is based on coverage, not achievements. Can you explain your stances in terms of SIGCOV? Timothytyy (talk) 23:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Paora NBAD, an SNG guideline, cannot supercede GNG. I.e. a subject without coverage does not warrant an article even if it passes SNG. Notability is not based on achievements. Therefore, please explain your stance in terms of SIGCOV. Thank you. Timothytyy (talk) 08:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Timothytyy, I was pointing out that the nomination is incorrect in its assertion that WP:NBAD is not met, when clearly it is met. I also believe the assertion in the nomination that her achievements are insignificant to be unreasonable, and the statement that there is no coverage online is clearly not correct. Paora (talk) 10:39, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you find any coverage? Timothytyy (talk) 14:13, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ResonantDistortion NBAD, an SNG guideline, cannot supercede GNG, which requires SIGCOV. An SNG-passing article without coverage should be deleted. The recently-added sources are nowhere near SIGCOV, so please provide some SIGCOV to explain your stance. Timothytyy (talk) 23:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not a single good source exists in the article and two simple before search brought up no others. WP:NBAD is no longer an actual guideline. If sources are found, please ping me. SportingFlyer T·C 11:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: WP:NBAD is no longer a guideline. No citation impact of SIGCOV. CastJared (talk) 12:38, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is unclear why above !votes claim that WP:NBAD is no longer a guideline - as by following the link it clearly is. It has been demonstrated above (and technically by meeting WP:NATH with a podium finish in the Commonwealth Games) that Bellingham meets current criteria with achievements that mean Significant coverage is likely to exist. This does not obviate GNG but gives leeway preventing quick deletion, and as the guideline clearly states WP:THEREISNORUSH. This sportsperson is not contemporary - it's been well over 20 years for some of their successes - and non-internet sources are more likely than not. Consequently 'liberal leeway' supports a keep argument. ResonantDistortion 13:53, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you actively participate in AfDs, you will observe that users tend not to use SNG as a formal guideline to keep/delete, because GNG is the base of notability, and SNGs nowadays lack research to prove that the guidelines can prove the sufficiency of SIGCOV. The comments saying "NBAD is not a guideline" are wrong, but I just don't see any implications of SNGs, especially NSPORT. After all, notability is based on sources instead of achievements. Timothytyy (talk) 14:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ResonantDistortion, NBAD is not a standalone guideline; it is a subguideline within the guideline of NSPORT, which requires GNG be met for all subjects. Athletes must also meet SPORTSBASIC for subguidelines to afford any presumption of additional coverage, and if GNG coverage cannot be identified, meeting a subguideline offers no protection from deletion. JoelleJay (talk) 21:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails GNG, which is the requirement for sportspeople to have articles. Meeting NBAD is irrelevant when the subject fails SPORTSBASIC, which further demands a SIGCOV source be cited in the article. Presumption of SIGCOV from NBAD is nullified if such a source is not found, and anyway it only affords leeway against speedying and for extenuating circumstances regarding additional sourcing; if the presumption is rebutted with a standard BEFORE, meeting the criterion is moot. JoelleJay (talk) 21:09, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I've added a couple of New Zealand Herald sources that do provide WP:SIGCOV, not substantially so, but enough to be borderline WP:NBASIC level. The fact that it apparently passes WP:NBAD, and the heavy use of pre-2000 print sources, heavily suggests that WP:NEXIST is likely met here. Has anyone actually examined the contents of the cited print sources? ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A lot of wrong statements here of missing coverage. In general it seems to me, that people are not searching correct, are not going to libraries, do not have access to the relevant sources (especially for older players and then thinking, that there are no sources). Easy to find are 32 participations in significant events on Wikidata as well as 9 identifiers there. Plus more sources in Kingston Gleaner, Johnstown Tribune Democrat, The Los Angeles Times, The Times, The Modesto Bee, Poughkeepsie Journal, Times Colonist, The Straits Times, Berita Harian, The New Paper, Today, The Asian Age, The Times Of India and and and. Florentyna (talk) 05:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*:Striking double vote. Timothytyy (talk) 05:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC) Deleted my short first participation (also Keep). Florentyna (talk) 05:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Analysis and comment on newly added sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No coverage of this person, there is an author/person who gives TED talks with the same name. Delete for lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even limiting the search to .nz websites ("Rebecca Bellingham" badminton site:.nz), still only get confirmation of matches she played. Oaktree b (talk) 15:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, As achievements are not given importance anymore in discussions unless the subject is Olympic or World medalist, I would like to read if some prose is available in source number 4 of the article, title of which looks convincing enough for significant coverage. Yes, I don't have access to that newspaper and will cast keep or delete on the basis of it. zoglophie 11:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Source 4 is a press-release (New Zealand Press Wire). It wouldn't count towards notability, only perhaps giving confirmation of personal info in an otherwise notable article. Oaktree b (talk) 19:08, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I've accessed all but two articles. [1] is NZOC, not independent Red XN. [2] is BWF non-independent stats Red XN. [3][5][17][19][20][21][24] (NZ Herald) are passing mentions in routine results coverage Red XN. [4] is a print source from Radio New Zealand Newswire on the Bellingham/Gordon marriage announcement -- unclear if it contains SIGCOV or is independent ?. [6] "Badminton guns off to training camp in Malaysia" from Sunday Star-Times--no evidence it has SIGCOV or is independent, plus it is coverage of her youth career so even less likely to count Red XN. [7] (The Dominion 1) is a trivial mention in a routine press release Red XN. [8-10, 12-14, 18] are trivial and routine tournament results from The Press and Waikato Times Red XN. [11] (The Dominion 2) is a trivial mention in a routine press release Red XN. [15] (Medicine Hat News) is very unlikely to contain SIGCOV Red XN. [16] (WorldBadminton.com) is a trivial mention in routine results Red XN. [22] (Badminton Stats) stats Red XN. [23] is a picture for sale Red XN. [25] (NZH 8/The Aucklander) is a passing mention about the couple Red XN.
    Even if the Radio NZ and Sunday Star-Times piece contains IRS SIGCOV (very doubtful), the subject still would not pass GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 21:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets WP:ANYBIO. Clearly lacks sources on the internet, but events took place well before news coverage shifted to the internet. Denaar (talk) 11:17, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Denaar, how does she meet ANYBIO? JoelleJay (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify, winning a sporting event has been deprecated as an indicator of notability, and there was global consensus that athletes must meet GNG and have a source containing SIGCOV cited in their biography. I've got access to the NZ newspapers from that time (1996 on) and there is no SIGCOV. JoelleJay (talk) 16:05, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rebecca_Bellingham&oldid=1163668175"