Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Cook

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. We sometimes overuse the LOCAL argument but the point about 1E has not been challenged Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler Cook

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

Run off the mill basketball player. Not much on Google. EROS ^message 03:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 04:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 04:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 04:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Not an especially noteworthy basketball player but there does seem to be some coverage in RS: [1] [2] [3] [4] ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 14:03, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the sources are just routine coverage not the indepth stuff needed for notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:20, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you actually examine the sources I provided or are you just sure they are routine? Some of the sources are rather indepth. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 01:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, bd2412 T 18:07, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - sources provided in keep vote cover only the subject applying for the NBA draft. And trying to enter the draft does not prove notability. Kirbanzo (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not pass WP:NBASKET or WP:GNG. Declaring for the NBA draft does not make you notable. SportingFlyer talk 23:47, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG. Also expanded the article a bit and added more sources. Dammit_steve (talk) 12:10, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The coverage appears to be routine sports reporting typical of any major college basketball player--injury, announcement of where he's decided to play, etc. The only thing that isn't obviously routine are the articles about whether or not he's going to return for his senior year at Iowa--and that seems pretty routine (or falls under WP:BLP1E). Definitely does not meet the SNG for basketball players. Papaursa (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article is a pretty extensive profile. Here is an article about an injury. Here is an article from the Associated Press about how he's Iowa's best player. This article isn't specifically about Cook but does devote several paragraphs to him. Another article from a local source. So it's not true that all the coverage is about him declaring for the draft. If the consensus here is to delete, I propose moving to draftspace or userfying. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 01:34, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that a Cedar Falls paper's coverage of a summer basketball league game in Cedar Falls, concerning an athlete who had yet to attend college can be considered "extensive" or used to claim WP:GNG is met. I would say it falls under WP:NHSPHSATH instead, with some WP:ROUTINE thrown in. I'm also skeptical that claims he's the best player on a team that finished 1 game out of last place in the Big 10 are sufficient to show notability. Even if the claim is true there are 347 division 1 basketball programs, all of whom have at least 1 player who can claim to be the team's best. Papaursa (talk) 04:09, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets gng with the sources in the article, including this one [5] from usatoday.Jacona (talk) 15:40, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Entering the NBA draft does not equal notability. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Exemplo347 (talk) 08:50, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As per WP:NCOLLATH, he needs to be the subject of non-trivial media coverage, and non-routine coverage. None of the cited sources really establish that in my opinion. The sources are either local papers/news channels, or in the case of the national ones, don't give more than trivial coverage: most college athletes could and indeed do get similar levels of coverage - this doesn't make them notable.FirefoxLSD (talk) 15:51, 12 May 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.