Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wale Dada

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. ✗plicit 13:23, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wale Dada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails (1) WP:NGRIDIRON (never appeared in a regular season game in the NFL, CFL, or other qualifying league -- NFL Europe and UFL are not qualifying leagues), (2) WP:NCOLLATH (no major awards and principally a backup [started one of 17 games at Washington State -- see here]), and (3) WP:GNG (my searches in both Google and Newspapers.com fail to turn up WP:SIGCOV of the type required). Cbl62 (talk) 07:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Finding a decent amount in the archives, such as [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Seems to meet GNG. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 01:37, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully disagree. Not one of these articles is focused on Dada as the primary topic. Given the lack of significant accomplishment at Washington State (1 career start) and zero appearances in a qualifying professional league, I would want to see SIGCOV focused more directly on Dada to support maintenance of a stand-alone article. Cbl62 (talk) 02:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 02:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I found nothing that I would consider significant independent coverage. In addition, he fails to meet WP:NGRIDIRON or WP:NCOLLATH. Papaursa (talk) 23:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No evidence of SIGCOV. JoelleJay (talk) 18:19, 3 August 2021 (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.