Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Brooks (basketball)

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. Star Mississippi 14:36, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Brooks (basketball)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This page has no valid references and this person is showing this Wikipedia page of him and selling Wikipedia pages creation service on Fiverr and Upwork, I have Googled this name and found no evidence or news articles on him, I am amazed to see why this page is still live without any references. As per this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Basketball/Notability he lacks notability especially point 2-3-4. - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 14:31, 9 July 2022 (UTC) (on behalf of IntelisMust who malformed this page)[reply]

Regardless of whether Brooks meets notability criteria for professional basketball players, the list of external links at the end are clearly intended to be sources. DS (talk) 14:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DragonflySixtyseven Link 4 is dead IntelisMust (talk) 14:37, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dead but on archive.org. I'll also point out that the notability guidelines are "any of", not "all of". Regardless of if he meets #2, #3, or #4... does he meet #1? (Maybe not, I haven't examined the sources.) DS (talk) 14:51, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2022 July 9. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:51, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Basketball, and Texas. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:25, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Note that Wikipedia:WikiProject Basketball/Notability is neither an Wikipedia policy or a guideline and has no saying on a notability of the subject. Per WP:NSPORT, all athletes must pass WP:GNG. While there are several source in the article, albeit not inline, but none of them is a WP:SIGCOV, only database links. I was unable to find any significant coverage on the subject online so as far as I can see, he fails the WP:GNG. Alvaldi (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This Wikipedia should not be deleted. It’s Philip Austin Brooks who played professionally basketball overseas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:1D51:21B0:4CEB:EDF2:9811:38E1 (talk) 13:04, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
New AfD comments and !votes belong at the bottom, not the top. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@LaundryPizza03the above user is the same guy whose page is being nominated for AFD. IntelisMust (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG. GPL93 (talk) 17:19, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the subject passes WP:SPORTBASIC. Franklin Darrk (talk) 09:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Franklin Darrk As you know WP:SPORTBASIC requires multiple WP:SIGCOV sources. There are none in the article and none have been listed here so I take it as you have found some more sources. Could you kindly share with us what you believe are the three best significant sources on the subject? Alvaldi (talk) 12:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, Brooks in no way meets the current WP:NHOOPS criteria under SPORTBASIC. He wouldn't even have passed the older version that included having played in overseas leagues considered "Top-Tier". The only "coverage" added in from a non-RS and is an "editorial" that's really just a press release and written by Brooks himself. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @GPL93 and @Alvaldithe above user whose name is Franklin is the same person as philip brooks and they are hiring other people through upwork for this Wikipedia fix. The above user has added fake website information such as weebly, and personal website including tax website to this page which I have removed it, he is continuously spamming it kindly keep checking his activity. IntelisMust (talk) 18:04, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GPL93: and @Alvaldi:, can you please explain to user:IntelisMust that primary sources can be used in an article, though it doesn't prove notability. He doesn't prove a meaningful edit summary just vandalizing the page. I don't want to get into an edit war with him. Please have a look at the page's history Franklin Darrk (talk) 14:30, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Franklin Darrk you are using personal website as a reference links including tax website that has nothing to do with this page. Any admins and editors can check your edits, you are even adding those links which are dead and have nothing to do with the subject. How come weebly.com is news website? how US tax website has to do with this guy? you added Euro link website that article is deleted already, so be on point rather than adding useless information. You are doing COI as I can see here. I will report to the admins very soon. IntelisMust (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't pass WP:NHOOPS, WP:SPORTSBASIC, or most importantly WP:GNG. - LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords°
Delete Not notable, fails all notability guidelines. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm not seeing the WP:SIGCOV that would be necessary for a BLP article. --Kinu ^t/_c 20:48, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Insufficient significant coverage by reliable sources to meet the criteria for inclusion. Fails WP:GNG and WP:N or any subset of the same. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:34, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS. Gusfriend (talk) 00:37, 16 July 2022 (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.