Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsewang Gyaltson (2nd nomination)

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. Ravenswing's analysis of the sources went undisputed and new sources were not mentioned. So Why 17:12, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tsewang Gyaltson

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

Non-notable hockey player. Lacks GNG to justify an article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:30, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - fails WP:NHOCKEY, but passes GNG as per sources in the first AFD. Just needs improvement. Madg2011 (talk) 00:44, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Honestly, I'm not seeing it. There's exactly ONE cite from the first AfD providing substantial coverage to the subject -- as opposed to namedrops, or nothing more than quoting the subject, which can't be used to support the notability of the subject -- and that's this one: [1] Only one is insufficient to meet the GNG, and when you take a good look at that one ... The Viewspaper? There's no information even on its website about this publication: where it's published, what its bonafides are, no address, no location, no nothing. No Wikipedia article on it either, which leaves me to wonder upon which basis this can be called a reliable source? Ravenswing 14:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete I agree with Ravenswing and don't think this quite passes GNG. Even if the benefit of the doubt is given to The Viewspaper, it is only one source as the rest are all more about the Indian National Team as opposed to him specifically. Ravendrop 07:01, 23 July 2017 (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.