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 keep. The consensus among editors is that coverage of this article subject meets GNG. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stan Robb[edit]

Stan Robb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

non-notable former NFL player who played in 3 games in 1926. Therapyisgood (talk) 19:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, and Pennsylvania. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Robb played three games in the NFL (starting all three, and scoring a touchdown, too), played several seasons of pro football in other leagues ([1]), and I find it very likely he has sufficient sigcov to pass gng, as one newspaper wrote that he "gained national repute as one of the fastest ends ever turned out at Centre College" (its just that many old newspapers are not online or available – also, here he is mentioned as being part of a team that would be "the greatest collection of college stars ever seen on a Delaware county gridiron") – He also received numerous mentions in newspapers which I believe could be combined to show notability, under the clause of NBIO which states, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability": [2] [3] [4] (a decent sized report in the Hartford Courant) [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. Sure, they're mostly short, but when I think about the sources, "could I develop a decent biography out of this," I think "yes." I'll try to expand it soon. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I believe that BeanieFan11 has provided sufficient evidence of SIGCOV. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep clear pass of [[WP:GNG].--Paul McDonald (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per BeanieFan11's excellent research. These time-sink nominations would be best kept on the drawing board and not added to RfD mainspace, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I believe BeanieFan11 has demonostrated that SIGCOV exists and that this user is notable. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the references provided by BeanieFan, making this a pass of WP:GNG. Frank Anchor 20:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The sources given above do appear to be significant enough coverage to meet the GNG, which is the only notability standard that matters when it comes to sports related biographies. Silverseren^C 01:30, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the analysis above by BeanieFan11 whose reseach shows that Robb meets WP:BASIC, which says If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. Cullen328 (talk) 02:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the sources found but not byet in the article. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 19:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with Canton Bulldogs: because there isn't enough WP:RS material to write a biography of the player. Newspaper reports describing games he played in will turn up a lot of hits for his name in search results, but that's not enough to write a biography. We know very little about this person other than that he played a few games for the Bulldogs; just put that in the article about the Bulldogs, no need for a separate page. Levivich (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I currently have to finish a draft I'm working on (I've got a ton of tabs open and I can't delete them all), but afterwards, I will prove to you that a decent biography can be written of this player. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:34, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, merging his biography with the Canton article would make no sense – its long enough already and you would need to balance it by adding other biographies, which would make it way too long. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:39, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

      @BeanieFan11: show me a source for Stan Robb like this Boston Globe obit for William Brooks and I'll change my !vote. Good job with the Brooks draft. I think there is enough room in the Canton Bulldogs article to mention significant players (indeed, the article would be incomplete without that), but I'd be fine with merging to List of Canton Bulldogs players as well (which could be expanded with paragraph-long player bios). Levivich (talk) 20:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per GNG. Rlendog (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per BeanieFan. Snow close this. Carrite (talk) 22:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, per Levivich. We don't accept routine transactional and game coverage for contemporary athletes due to their content being unencyclopedick, and the same type of material doesn't magically become adequate just because it's on an athlete from 100 years ago. JoelleJay (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Merge True, the citations here have more meat than the ones at the Marv Smith article, which are just statistical errata. But still, it is just "well, he's hired" bits in the local paper. Insufficient notability. Zaathras (talk) 01:19, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - Routine game coverage isn't sufficient to meet GNG. –dlthewave ☎ 03:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note to closer. If the consensus is not in favor of keeping, please move to draftspace so I can improve this and show that a decent biographical article can be written. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Levivich and NSPORTS, no SIGCOV, only participation-based notability=not notable. FOARP (talk) 18:15, 3 February 2023 (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.