Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Burgener

: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. Joyous! | Talk 02:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

=[[:Mike Burgener]]=

:{{la|Mike Burgener}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Burgener Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Mike Burgener}})

I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:Kvng with the following rationale "Significant coverage in one cited relable source: [http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/11262964/crossf-explosive-growth-fuels-safety-concerns]. Articles with marginal notability are not good prod candidates.". Well, I think this one story - plus all the other few mentions in passing - still make him not-encyclopedic due to failure of notability. Please also note that the conclusion at WP:NSPORT is that coaches are never notable by default, not unless they meet other criteria related to other activities. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:01, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Delete non-notable weightlifting coach.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:04, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete by all means as this is clear advertising, and I concur with Piotrus that there's nothing genuinely significant, let alone a convincing article. SwisterTwister talk 04:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Delete unable to find coverage adequate to establish notability. ~Kvng (talk) 12:41, 8 December 2016 (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.