Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laura Oprea

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Laura Oprea}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Laura Oprea}})

Does not have enough coverage to meet WP:NSPORT requirements. All the articles I found on her where just a mention of her name. Darkm777 (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Darkm777 (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Please stop wasting our time with these Olympic medalist deletion discussions. Coverage exists; see the [https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Oprea extensive Romanian article], and Oprea is extremely accomplished, having numerous world championship medals, being a world champion and Olympic medalist, which satisfies WP:NOLY. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:22, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep: Looking at the corresponding Romanian article, https://www.realitateamedia.ro/canotaj-laura-oprea-singura-reprezentanta-a-judetului-la-olimpiada-din-brazilia-de-la-nisiporesti-spre-rio-de-janeiro/ appears to be WP:SIGCOV, and while https://web.archive.org/web/20160822224535/http://www.agerpres.ro/sport/2016/05/08/canotaj-echipajul-feminin-de-dublu-rame-fara-carmaci-al-romaniei-medaliat-cu-bronz-la-europene-11-41-19 and https://web.archive.org/web/20160815223353/http://www.agerpres.ro/sport/2016/08/13/alerta-jo-2016-canotaj-medalie-de-bronz-pentru-echipajul-femininde-8-1-al-romaniei-17-21-01 are less impressive I think there is enough here for a WP:SPORTSBASIC pass. Let'srun (talk) 02:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• :*Keep per Let'srun and Beaniefan11. Canary757 (talk) 07:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Olympics, and Romania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:09, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep: A participant and medalist of a world's foremost sports competition is considered notable. Best Regards (CP) 08:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep – Per above. The nominator does not seem to understand the basic guidelines of the project. Svartner (talk) 12:42, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep – Per WP:GNG. Source are clear. This nom should be closed.BabbaQ (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - based on the work done by {{U|Let'srun}}, with thanks. But the criticism of the nom. would be more relevant if any of this were actually in the article. A single good source, with the others found, is not, in fact, a clear pass of notability guidelines, but I think it is close enough and means that the article could be written. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 12:44, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.