Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly Nash (2nd nomination)

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 delete. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 21:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Nash

[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)

No independent coverage in reliable sources, all coverage in RS that I was able to find was either interviews (not independent) or unbelievably trivial. Does not appear to meet WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 22:02, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I put six references on there, how many do I need? I spent quite of bit of time on this page. Not recently because I've been busy but I did add some more info recently. I am getting frustrated with the process especially since I have another page/draft (Olivia Dekker) I've been waiting two months to get approved.- Dwightform (talk)

(Updated) I did add more references on the page- Dwightform (talk)

As I said on my talk page, the number of sources isn't the issue, it's that all of the sources cited are poor quality and essentially count for nothing when assessing notability. Sources #1, #2, #5, and #8 are interviews, which are not independent. Source #3 is a non-independent profile on the MLB website (after all, she works for the MLB Network). Sources #4, #6, and #7 are complete trivia which say nothing about the subject. Notability will only be established if you can find independent, reliable sources that cover the subject in significant depth (per WP:GNG), or if you can demonstrate that the subject has won a notable award (per WP:ANYBIO). _signed,Rosguill ^talk 03:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am a bit on the fence here. I would expect that someone with her degree of prominence as a sportscaster would generate enough coverage to meet GNG. But I haven't found quite enough to satisfy me yet. I would certainly give credit for the Tampa Bay Times as at least one solid source, with a number of stories referenced in the article plus this, a smaller piece here, and others. But that is just one source. Otherwise, while I would not discount the Sports Business Daily article completely, since it was written and published independently of her, it is rather weak. And while I can't dismiss the Instagram bit entirely, since it was covered in many reliable sources, it is also a weak hook on which to hand a notability argument. So I still think we need at least one more solid source outside the Tampa Bay Times before I can support keeping. 16:38, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~ {talk} 23:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 04:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of MLB Network personalities, does not warrant a standalone article as i do not see anything beyond a competent journalist doing their job. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:30, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet any WP:SNG, and I do not find the "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" that would enable her to meet WP:BASIC. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete local sports reporter who fails WP:SIGCOV. E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:01, 10 April 2019 (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.