Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Max Jenkins (cyclist)

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. Actually, I missed seeing the withdrawal statement. Typically, they are put up closer to the nomination statement. But my oversight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Max Jenkins (cyclist)

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

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

BLP with only one working reference, which does not support the content of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 22:53, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cycling and Russia. Rathfelder (talk) 22:53, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:01, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I found this: The Backstory: Max Jenkins, pro cyclist. Anyone able to check Russian language sources? There might be more coverage out there. Silver seren^C 23:05, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I get "Sorry, this content is not available in your region.". Rathfelder (talk) 09:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It works fine for me. Are you outside the US? Silver seren^C 12:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Afraid so. Rathfelder (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was able to find a good number of sources after only a quick search, he received a good amount of coverage from around 2010-2013. Passes WP:NCYCLING and should have enough for WP:GNG also now. There are also definitely more sources still out there.Seacactus 13 (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to withdraw this. Thank you.Rathfelder (talk) 22:51, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem. Glad I was able to help find sources and improve the article, thanks for bringing to attention. Seacactus 13 (talk) 17:54, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per User:Seacactus 13's additions. This was a very strange relisting, considering the nominator had withdrawn. St Anselm (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I presume they're going with "any outstanding Delete votes" as the argument to relist it. But, yeah, it definitely could have had a closure done regardless. Silver seren^C 18:53, 27 September 2022 (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.