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.
Weak Keep Some non-routine coverage
here. I'm a bit surprised I couldn't find more for someone who made nearly 50 Super League appearances. Perhaps someone can add more using offline sources, as a lot of websites unfortunately haven't kept archives during the time period he played in.
J Mo 101 (
talk)
09:47, 5 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep There seem to be a few articles with more than trivial mention. Given the time period, I also suspect there may be additional sources out there that are not reflected by internet sources. At least weak support for keeping. –
notwally (
talk)
23:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Baffled at the assertions of SIGCOV here. The source linked above is 229 words, of which all but ~5 sentences are direct quotes. The remainder include a couple sentences summarizing what he says in a quote (not independent analysis) and/or relating "what he feels" (ditto), e.g. But after a lengthy time rehabilitating, Molloy is now over the worst of it. and The young forward is hoping to push on and make a big impression with the Giants. With last season almost being forgotten about, Molloy now can set out some targets to work towards – and again it may also involve going out on loan., both of which are immediately followed by more detailed quotes from him. Essentially the only secondary independent coverage is a single sentence mentioning he missed a season due to injury. Nowhere near IRS SIGCOV. This is also a British player from the 2010s, well into the internet news era in a country with highly accessible digital media, so I am very skeptical of claims that coverage exists offline somewhere.
JoelleJay (
talk)
21:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
My stance on the potential deletion of this article is that it should be retained, primarily due to the credibility of the 9 sources supporting it. These sources, I believe, are robust enough to establish the article's notability.
Some users here may have stronger opinions based on the
WP:SIGCOV of this article, but I see potential for improvement. A 'weak keep' is possible for me because this is a notable topic, and there are likely more substantial sources waiting to be added to enhance the article.
Normanhunter2 (
talk)
23:05, 26 June 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.