Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alisha Palmowski

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 draftify‎. Arguments for draftifying carried more P&G weight than those for retention in mainspace. Owen× 15:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alisha Palmowski (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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMOTORSPORT as a driver who has only competed in entry level series (Ginetta Junior Championship and FIA Formula 4). Article is at best WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. MSportWiki (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep: While F1A is an entry level series, it has a much greater level of attention than lets say a normal F4 championship. Also, she has done the Formula E all womens test. The article could do with some padding out though.<span data-dtsignatureforswitching="1"></span> AidenT06 (talk) 22:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft. Palmowski, is a F1 Academy wildcard driver, and since all F1 Academy drivers have pages, why not her? She is also the runner-up of the 2024 GB4 Championship and can be considered as a future prospect for female racing drivers. At least draft the page BurningBlaze05 (talk) 05:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

F1 Academy is an entry-level series, therefore its' competitors don't meet notability guidelines – WP:WHATABOUTISM is not an excuse. I have no issue with drafting, however "can be considered as a future prospect" is the definition of WP:CRYSTAL. MSportWiki (talk) 11:13, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I know nothing about this content area, but here are the sources I could locate: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. I don't know how to evaluate content in this area which seems hyper specific to motor sports so I will leave it to others to determine whether this meets WP:SPORTSBASIC/WP:SIGCOV. Best.4meter4 (talk) 03:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She EASILY meets those guidelines unless you consider GB4 to not be a series of significant national importance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duds 2k (talkcontribs) 13:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as arguments are divided between Keep and Draftify.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify per WP:POTENTIAL. The article already has at least one reliable source, and a Google search brings up several industry specific sources.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 09:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify A young sportsperson with decent coverage that is probably not enough to meet WP:GNG. However, the Autosport piece has about a dozen sentences of independent coverage of the subject, and other articles have some bits as well, indicating that WP:SPORTBASIC is met. "Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability, but it does indicate that there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article." I think this goes beyond routine coverage and is a good start for an article. JTtheOG (talk) 21:07, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    P.S. I don't believe NMOTORSPORT has much relevance anymore anyways following WP:NSPORTS2022. Either coverage exists or it doesn't. JTtheOG (talk) 21:12, 11 December 2024 (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.