Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Maravich

: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 merge to Pete Maravich. Shimeru 06:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

=[[Josh Maravich]]=

:{{la|Josh Maravich}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Maravich}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|Josh Maravich}})

fails WP:Notability - non-notable basketball player. Presumably the article was written because he is Pete Maravich's son and he did play at LSU, but only as a bench player, it would seem. Mayumashu (talk) 01:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Keep. While the notability may derive from his name, there was a fairly in-depth NYT article on him [http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/17/sports/basketball-one-maravich-is-content-at-end-of-lsu-s-bench.html] and also found two other articles with more than a passing mention of him. [http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_314227.html] [http://cjonline.com/stories/032203/spo_ncaamaravich.shtml]. To me this appears to pass WP:ATHLETE. elgnomotalk 05:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:34, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

  • Delete This would have been WP:NOTNEWS if it had been written in 2004 when the Times article came out. He most certainly does not pass WP:ATHLETE as basketball fans interpret it. Basically, Wikipedia:NSPORT#Basketball describes which professional basketball leagues are considered to be such that their players are inherently notable. Mandsford 14:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep seems to be enough third party coverage apparent from Google news search. Not a huge amount though. Gigs (talk) 01:05, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete does not have enough to stand on its own. Should be a mention at the bottom of Pete Maravich -Drdisque (talk) 01:57, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Merge into Pete Maravich. Coverage does yet not appear significant enough for a stand-alone article. --PinkBull 21:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

: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.