Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Amos Moore

: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. The Bushranger One ping only 00:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

=[[Harry Amos Moore]]=

:{{la|Harry Amos Moore}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Harry Amos Moore}})

csd declined on the basis that the father was highly notable. So he was, but the existence of sources for a player with only a future professional record may meet WP:GNG, but does not meet NOT INHERITED. or NOT INDISCRIMINATE. And even the GNG says meeting it does not necessarily mean we should have an article. DGG ( talk ) 21:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Note - I decline my own G3 speedy (hoax) as I originally thought it was a hoax. I didn't say he's notable because his father is. He might be notable if there has been significant coverage in reliable sources. It can certainly be argued that even this wouldn't make him notable but this would imply that it's a contentious issue meaning it wouldn't apply for A7 and at the very least, wasn't a hoax as I originally thought. If I had to guess, he's not notable but I don't base my !votes on the concept of notability alone. I base it on the research I do. Your reasoning seems somewhat vague. Do you think he's not notable simply because of your misunderstanding of my statement or did you actually do any research? OlYeller21Talktome 22:03, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

::put simply, I thought him not notable because of his lack of accomplishments. Coverage has to be of something significant; coverage without significance is TABLOID. I'm not criticizing you, it's just that this seemed the best way to do it. I could have speedy deleted as A7, but it might have been seen as contentious. DGG ( talk ) 22:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete - Fails WP:GNG, WP:ATHLETE, and WP:ANYBIO. Subject has on instance of significant coverage. On its own, not able to infer notability and I feel that it inherently does not infer notability as it was only a notable instance based on the notability of his father. One other piece of coverage exists and it was published by the professional team he signed with. I did a [http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_search=1&q=%22Harry+Moore%22+melbourne+rugby Google News search] and [http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&btnmeta_news_search=1&q=%22Harry+Moore%22+melbourne+rugby#q=%22Harry+Moore%22+melbourne+rugby&hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&source=lnt&tbs=ar:1&sa=X&ei=5u6hTqn9C5DqtgeL1_yJBQ&ved=0CA8QpwUoBQ&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=8ad8b203bbd56586&biw=1152&bih=755 Googles News archive search] to find those articles. He fails WP:ATHLETE because he signed with a professional team's U-15 team and not their main team. It seems like he may be notable in the future but I don't see that any inclusion guidelines are satisfied at this time. OlYeller21Talktome 22:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. --Bob247 (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete. A classic up and coming article. Ray-Rays 20:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond88824 (talk • contribs)

: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.