Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ellie Miles

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 no consensus. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ellie Miles

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

Fails notability criteria for rugby union players as the Women's Premiership is not fully professional (see the WikiProject's list), which is how the "major competition" requirement of WP:SPORTSPERSON is assessed for rugby union players. Furthermore, fails WP:BASIC due to the lack of depth in the coverage presented in the article's citations. Any number of people are casually mentioned in local newspapers and specialist subject newspapers; this does not render them notable. Furthermore, this article is more or less orphaned, only being linked to in the mainspace from Miles (surname) and Tunbridge Wells Girls' Grammar School. Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 07:20, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 07:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 07:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 07:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 07:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It has sufficient sources around it to meet WP:GNG. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: GNG requires reliable sources giving significant coverage, not just any sources mentioning the subject trivially. So let's go through them:
  1. Her section on the Harlequins website – nope, fails WP:IS#How to meet the requirement
  2. Her section on the Women's Elite Rugby – nope, fails WP:SIGCOV
  3. An article on the Harlequins website – nope, IS# again
  4. An article on another club's website that mentions her in passing – nope, SIGCOV again
  5. Kent & Sussex Courier on the fact she ran a school rugby club – nothing wrong with the source this time, but the subject matter hardly creates notability. Curiously the Bexhill Observer frequently discusses what the local parish priest, Fr David Reynish, has been up to. So I guess that means he's notable? o.O
  6. Rushall life – nope, in fact that's not even an allowable source, see WP:BLPSPS
  7. Kent & Sussex Courier – nope, see 5, this time it also fails SIGCOV
  8. Kent & Sussex Courier – see 5
  9. Tunbridge Wells RFC – nope, fails both SIGCOV and IS#
  10. Schoolgamesfinals.org – nope, she's not even mentioned in the prose bit, so SIGCOV again
  11. Tunbridge Wells RFC again – can't comment on SIGCOV because offline, still IS# issue though
  12. Another article on the Harlequins site – nope, obviously IS# again
  13. The Rugby Paper – maybe, can't comment on the SIGCOV though
  14. Times of Tunbridge Wells – fails SIGCOV yet again
So in summary, while 13 of these sources might be fine as sources of information for the article, only four of them (if being charitable, otherwise nil) actually qualify as sources that can support the subject's notability - and three of them are from the same publication. Sorry, but from where I'm sitting it looks like Ellie doesn't meet WP:GNG in any way, shape or form.--Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 21:58, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This might be case of an article too soon. Perhaps the best option might be to draftify or userify. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I saw that Time & Leisure magazine recently covered her as a fast-rising female rugby player who is getting more women involved with the sport. It's significant coverage about her, which I added to her entry.^[1] Lonehexagon (talk) 22:29, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that is an interview. Which means it is not an independent source. Please read WP:RS.104.163.148.25 (talk) 10:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relist #1
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon 04:41, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Per WP:GNG, a subject may be suitable for an article if the subject "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." In this case, she is discussed in The Kent and Sussex Courier,^[2] Time & Leisure Lifestyle Magazine,^[3]. Miles was also honored by the Turnbridge Wells government^[4] which was mentioned in the Times of Tunbridge Wells.^[5] Lonehexagon (talk) 18:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Assessment of new sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ansh 666 19:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lonehexagon, please read WP:RS, as all four of the last sources you suggested are not reliable. Two are name mentions only, without detail. We do not use ISSU sources (see WP:RS). The other source is an interview. All four reference suggestions suggestions fail WP:RS, just as the article subject fails WP:GNG.104.163.148.25 (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What does ISSU mean? I did not see that term in the page you linked to. Lonehexagon (talk) 18:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I checked and she does fail NRU so we're left with gng. I opened the new refs and they don't support gng, I opened a couple of the refs in the article itself to corroborate the rebut of the sources above and it appears correct. Szzuk (talk) 20:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Weak keep There are no women's leagues listed in the notability essay and there are no citations to support "fully professional" which is odd. This athlete plays "top level of women's rugby union in England", Women's Premiership. Re: statements about references failing WP:RS, when I search for "interview" or "Issu" on WP:RS, there are no results. Perhaps, you meant something else. Primary sources are ok for supporting information. Hmlarson (talk) 23:17, 26 February 2018 (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.

[1] ttps://www.timeandleisure.co.uk/articles/interviews/5139-ellie-west-harlequins.html

[2] ttps://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-38727562.html

[3] ttps://www.timeandleisure.co.uk/articles/interviews/5139-ellie-west-harlequins.html

[4] ttp://www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk/residents/news/website-news-articles/2016/october/love-where-we-live-awards-ceremony

[5] ttps://issuu.com/one-media/docs/times_of_tunbridge_wells_19th_octob/4

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]