Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ümit Uygunsözlü

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. appears GNG is met. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:51, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ümit Uygunsözlü

[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)

Fails WP:NSPORTS and WP:GNG. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:35, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:35, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:46, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Google search turns up some coverage (e.g., here, here, here, here, and here), but the language barrier and lack of familiarity with Turkish media prevents me from evaluating properly. Cbl62 (talk) 21:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cbl62 The TRT Haber is a reliable source, but it's in Spanish (don't ask me why). From the above sources, I'd say that the Habertürk and Anadolu Agency sources (the final two) are also reliable. However the content of these three sources is the same, the Habertürk one literally starts with "ANKARA (AA) -", with AA being the initials of Anadolu Ajansı. My own search however does result in some other sources:

Milli dartçı Ümit Uygunsözlü bir ilke imza attı, TRT Haber, 18 April 2017
Dartta büyük başarı, CNN Türk, 30 April 2017
'Kızgın Türk' Ümit, oklarını Londra'ya çevirdi, Anadolu Agency, 30 October 2017

The CNN source is a bit too short for my liking to be considered "substantial", but together with the AA source above it totals up to three reliable and significant sources with one not-so-significant but reliable source. I am not quite familiar with darting, so if a SNG exists I won't be bothered to look at it, though I think this meets the general guideline, thus making SNGs irrelevant and being enough to keep this. ~Styyx^{Talk? ^-^} 19:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I feel that this article deserves a look from someone with some Turkish language expertise. References have been found, more may be out there, I feel like this is one of those articles that could meet guidelines with some work. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 23:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The CNN Türk source looks a bit flimsy but there is also this article published in Milliyet. These combined mean that there is enough coverage in independent sources for this individual to pass GNG. --GGT (talk) 00:27, 2 February 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.