Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eduardo García (boxer)
- 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. Spartaz Humbug! 11:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
- Eduardo García (boxer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete: not particularly notable boxing coach; does not derive notability from his sons, Robert and Mikey, who are/were professional boxers. Not exactly Cus D'Amato. Quis separabit? 03:38, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 10:26, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep he may not be as high profile as Cus D'Amato, but do you have to be the most famous trainer in the history of boxing to pass? He has trained multiple world champions including a lineal world champion. I am already at Keep but if more references can be found I would be inclined to move to Strong Keep.--Donniediamond (talk) 10:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I don't believe the reference linked in the article, the sole reference used in the article, relates to the person in question. Could it be his son? References need to be added to the article to pass WP:V or I could shift completely to Delete. I also propose that the article is moved to Eduardo García (trainer). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donniediamond (talk • contribs) 10:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Good catch. I removed that reference and put an appropriate tag.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- I've added a new reference to if from The Ring. There appears to be a lot of articles about him on the net, not sure how many have him as their primary focus though.--Donniediamond (talk) 11:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- He seems to get pretty extensive coverage in this article from the LA Times back in 1996.--Donniediamond (talk) 12:09, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- I would say that article is about the fighters not the trainer and that the article's only reference is a passing mention. I do agree that, if kept, the title should reflect he's more notable as a trainer than a boxer. Papaursa (talk) 03:45, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
- This article in Sports Illustrated adds more flesh to the bones as does this in the LA Times and this article refers to him as 'one of the greatest boxing trainers of the last 30 years.'
- I would say that article is about the fighters not the trainer and that the article's only reference is a passing mention. I do agree that, if kept, the title should reflect he's more notable as a trainer than a boxer. Papaursa (talk) 03:45, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
- He seems to get pretty extensive coverage in this article from the LA Times back in 1996.--Donniediamond (talk) 12:09, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- I've added a new reference to if from The Ring. There appears to be a lot of articles about him on the net, not sure how many have him as their primary focus though.--Donniediamond (talk) 11:44, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Good catch. I removed that reference and put an appropriate tag.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep the above reliable sources are good enough for verification and proof of notability,in my opinionAtlantic306 (talk) 23:21, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep While the coverage is not overwhelming, I think it is sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Again I would advocate for a change of title to better reflect his notability is as a boxing trainer. Papaursa (talk) 05:04, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
- 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.