Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Ecker

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep‎. after substantial work has been done on the article. Liz Read! Talk! 08:16, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Ecker

[edit]

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

Lisa Ecker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

As usual with pages on minor athletes recreated after G5, there are no biographical references. All sources are directories or passing mentions. A career spanning two entire years! Finished 43rd in Rio! But DNQ for the final. Come on. This is absolutely classic WP:NOTDIR material. A wedding announcement years after retirement from a career that barely got started is not WP:SIGCOV. Creator is banned for serial re-creation of a related article. Guy (help! - typo?) 01:07, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A senior career spanning 5 years, from stuff that's in the article but hey ;) (I am hoping that emoji indicates a correction given in a happy spirit. Will double check GNG and equivalent sport guidelines and see if she passes. If not, still worth the effort :) ) Red Fiona (talk) 07:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a career that barely got started - the article says she was national champion fourteen times, and it did at the time you AfD'd. Did you miss that while you were glorying over her not qualifying for the Olympic final? Anyway, keep per WP:NSPORTS, meets gymnastics #2. Kingsif (talk) 21:16, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kingsif, that is not a valid !vote rationale when SPORTCRIT has not been demonstrated. JoelleJay (talk) 00:11, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is in light of the sources which are better than you pretend. Kingsif (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No biographical sources, no significant coverage, no article. This is a living individual. We should not drop our standards so that we can become a directory of every person who ever wore their country's colours, regardless of how many sockpuppets of banned accounts are utterly determined to make it so. Either that or go and amend WP:BLP and WP:NOTDIR to introduce carveouts for participants in sporting events. Guy (help! - typo?) 20:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Thank you for your patience while found articles to help the article meet WP:SIGCOV. I think it does now. There are 3 articles that are mostly about her, in deeper detail than just a passing mention, from independent reliable sources. Those three are: 1) Reference 5, an Austrian Gymnastics Federation retrospective of her career, 2) reference 9, a "International Gymnast" journal article about her return from injury, and 3) Der Standard (one of the Austrian papers of record; along with Die Presse) reporting on her Olympic performance. Along with those, there are also 2 or 3 articles which are either mostly about her and her performances (Ref 7, sport.de report on her retirement, ref 10, Der Standard reporting on the Austrian Gymnastic Championships, and ref 11, Austrian Gymnastics Federation about her wedding, which I grant Guy doesn't rate). Reference 6 is mostly about her coach, but her coach talks about Ecker and her training. The other references are results reporting or general sports database references. I think there are at least 3 in-depth, reliable references which, I think, means the article meets SIGCOV. Red Fiona (talk) 21:00, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Redfiona99, the Austrian Gymnastics Federation is not an independent source and cannot contribute to GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 00:12, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:HEY. Sources added by Redfiona99 satisfy WP:GNG. Nice work. Cielquiparle (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2023 (UTC) Striking my previous comment; please see my updated comment below. Cielquiparle (talk) 23:31, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Refs 1 (Rio 2016), 2 (2015worldgymnastics.com), 3 (Rio 2016), 5 (Austrian Gymnastics Federation), 8 (gymnastics.sport), and 11 (Austrian Gymnastics Federation) are not independent/secondary and do not contribute to notability (per NSPORT, sports organizations are not independent of the athletes they oversee) Red XN. Ref 4 (Der Standard #1, reprint of S24) is a routine tournament writeup that is almost entirely quotes from her from a press release Red XN. Ref 6 (Kurier #1) is a Q&A interview with her coach with no independent commentary on her; quotes are never secondary, and quotes from an affiliate are never independent Red XN. Ref 7 (sport.de) is a trivial retirement press release Red XN. Ref 10 (Der Standard #2) is another wholly routine results announcement Red XN. Even if Ref 9 (International Gymnast) was SIGCOV (I can't access it; can anyone here?), the subject still would not pass GNG as multiple pieces of SIGCOV are required and SUSTAINED would need to be demonstrated. Sports sources must be demonstrably non-routine, and nothing here even remotely approaches that. JoelleJay (talk) 00:10, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Refs 4, 7, 9, and 10 are all appropriate secondary SIGCOV. You may think that a write-up in a newspaper of note doesn't count because, seemingly, competitions are routine and therefore coverage of the results is trivial, but that's your opinion that goes beyond the demands of sourcing requirements. Please don't try to pass off such an opinion as policy again. Kingsif (talk) 00:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Material that is routine, such as coverage of sports event results, is not encyclopedic per NOTNEWS. Ref 4 is routine results entirely derived from a press release from the Austrian Olympic Committee, so also not independent. Ref 7 is literally a two-sentence retirement announcement that is, predictably, actually from the sports PR newswire and not independent reporting anyway. Ref 10 is more utterly routine tournament results and is ultimately sourced to the ÖFT via GYMmedia. Ref 9 does look decent, but again, one ref does not suffice for NSPORT/GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 23:50, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    How dare news outlets get their tournament result information from the official tournament results. Listen to yourself. Kingsif (talk) 12:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Derivatives of press releases are not intellectually independent, and coverage of press releases is defined as routine by NOTNEWS. The news outlets aren't writing their own commentary on the results, they are republishing the press releases that were given to them, with info occasionally reordered. That is not sufficient for GNG, and there is longstanding consensus that standard transactional reports are routine. JoelleJay (talk) 18:27, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, your constant reference to "routine tournament results" sounds ridiculous, but we get it – you don't like sports, you don't like sports bios on Wikipedia, and you will go out of your way to WP:BLUDGEON any discussion if it doesn't go your way. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is basic disagreement over whether or not sources satisfy SIGCOV (according to Wikipedia guidelines).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:35, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This article is a definite keep as it easily satisfies both WP:NGYMNAST and WP:GNG. WP:GYMNAST suggests that Significant coverage is likely to exist for artistic gymnasts if they meet any of the criteria below: Won a senior individual medal at an elite international competition, and in this case Lisa Ecker has not just one, but seven individual medals at elite international competitions, in addition to her 14 national championship titles. Arguably the top Austrian artistic gymnast in recent history, Ecker also has significant coverage in independent reliable sources which satisfies WP:GNG – more higher quality references than any of her peers on Wikipedia and WP:SUSTAINED since 2012, when she won her first international medal (silver), the Austrian national title, and Austrian "Gymnast of the Year", through her retirement in 2017 following her 43rd place finish in the individual all-around at the 2016 Summer Olympics, as the only Austrian gymnast to qualify and only the second time Austria was represented in artistic gymnastics at the Olympics after a 48-year hiatus. While there are many articles to choose from which are now cited in the article, my top three are:
Again, the info on Ecker in the latter two sources is routine results recaps for sportspeople. NOTNEWS specifies that coverage of press releases is considered routine, and the Der Standard article is little more than a refactored version of this press release from the ÖFT. The only facts added by Der Standard that are about Ecker are that she is 23 and from Linz. The rest of the novel material is not about Ecker at all. The Kurier piece does have some non-quote material, but a closer look shows it is primarily just summaries of a succeeding quote rather than actual commentary by the author. This article just isn't enough for GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lisa_Ecker&oldid=1165610627"