Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Washington, D.C.
![]() | Points of interest related to Washington, D.C. on Wikipedia: Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Stubs – To-do |
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Washington, D.C.. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Washington, D.C.|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Washington, D.C.. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

watch |
Washington, D.C.
edit- Ankhlejohn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The sources in the article and a WP:BEFORE mostly turn up press releases and interviews in non-RSes. I don't see anything that indicates general notability or WP:NMUSIC. BuySomeApples (talk) 04:34, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Businesspeople, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:56, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Citations are fake, article was originally possibly generated by a llm and the creator has been banned see here for more info. aside from that; Ankhlejohn doesnt seem to meet general notability guidelines and there does not appear to be any significant coverage of them fifteen thousand two hundred twenty nine (talk) 12:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nom: this subject appears to fail WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:ANYBIO for lack of substantial coverage in multiple reliable sources. JFHJr (㊟) 03:16, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
- Youth Service America (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article lacks notability - specifically, reliable, secondary sources that are not just interviews. WormEater13 (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Washington, D.C.. WormEater13 (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. As the nominator says, its the article that lacks citations, not the organization that lacks notability. I have added a half-dozen citations from reliable 3rd party sources and will continue to work on it until the nominator is satisfied. Freechild (talk) 19:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- A large majority of the new sources that you've added to the article are interviews with individuals closely connected to the subject, and upon searching for notable sources about the subject, I can only seem to find primary sources. There's also many citations that you've added that don't have URLs. For example, one source you linked is the CEO of Youth Service America (Steve Culbertson) announcing that he will be speaking at his alma mater for a keynote, which is a clear connection to the subject, and is also not related to Youth Service America. WormEater13 (talk) 12:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
- Scott Kahoe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article on an individual that appears to have might have played a single season of professional lacrosse, though it isn't clear he actually ever played. Sourcing is all either non-independent profiles or statistical outlines, with one local news outlet on his transfer from Syracuse to Georgetown. Doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:ATHLETE. nf utvol (talk) 18:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, and Sports. nf utvol (talk) 18:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:33, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- Weak Keep. This in-depth story in The Philadelphia Inquirer along with this and this from Syracuse.com is probably sufficient for GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:07, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- In this particular case, I think those sources are fairly Run-of-the-Mill coverage.
Local newspapers also cover high school and college athletes, in every city and town, there are several high schools and colleges and papers that cover them; inevitably, these athletes will receive coverage.
- The Inquirer and the Syracuse.com are both major news outlets, but they also serve as local news, which does make this a little less cut and dry than it otherwise would be. All of these sources, though, are simply profiles of a local high school (in the case of the Inquirer), or collegiate (in the case of the Syracuse.com sources) athlete, without much of a context outside of local interest. A quick perusal of both shows that these sorts of profiles happen daily, sometimes multiple times daily. Using these three sources to establish notability would mean that there are quite literally thousands of similar cases where non-notable high school or collegiate athletes would now meet the notability threshold for an article, just based on coverage in the Inquirer and Syracuse.com.
- Finally, to quote the WP:ATHLETE guideline:
The guidelines on this page are intended to reflect the fact that sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have achieved success in a major international competition at the highest level.
In this case, the subject appears to have only played a single season of professional lacrosse, with almost no coverage of this beyond a stats page. The coverage on his participation in a collegiate championship is limited to a single page commenting on his social media posts. nf utvol (talk) 13:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)- ROTM is an essay; whether there's "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" is all that matters here. And in this case, he does meet that, with in-depth stories in The Inquirer and Syracuse.com. The significant coverage on the subject does not need to be regarding something that you subjectively deem of greater than "local interest" in order to count as significant coverage. You say that this would allow for "quite literally thousands of similar cases where non-notable high school or collegiate athletes would now meet the notability threshold for an article" – however, the difference here is that the subject also competed professionally at, what I believe is, the highest-level of lacrosse (i.e. he's not just some random local college player like you're making him out to be). Lastly, the ATHLETE "guidelines" are just a garbled mess that few still rely on. Note that NSPORT includes nothing talking about lacrosse, thus even the greatest lacrosse player of all time would still fail it. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- After doing a little more digging it isn't clear that Kahoe ever actually played a regular season game of professional lacrosse. According to the stats page linked in the article, he was drafted by the Boston Blazers in 2009 but never played a game. Then, according to Lacrosse All Stars (which I'm not sure is a RS anyway), he was drafted by the Florida Launch in 2013, but I can't find anything at all that indicates he ever played a single game with them beyond playing on their practice squad in 2017. This, in my view, means that whatever time he may have spent in MLL/PLL/NLL does not serve to add to his notability. nf utvol (talk) 15:09, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- Well, if he never played in the MLL/PLL/NLL, that makes the case weaker, though he still arguably meets GNG. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- After doing a little more digging it isn't clear that Kahoe ever actually played a regular season game of professional lacrosse. According to the stats page linked in the article, he was drafted by the Boston Blazers in 2009 but never played a game. Then, according to Lacrosse All Stars (which I'm not sure is a RS anyway), he was drafted by the Florida Launch in 2013, but I can't find anything at all that indicates he ever played a single game with them beyond playing on their practice squad in 2017. This, in my view, means that whatever time he may have spent in MLL/PLL/NLL does not serve to add to his notability. nf utvol (talk) 15:09, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- ROTM is an essay; whether there's "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" is all that matters here. And in this case, he does meet that, with in-depth stories in The Inquirer and Syracuse.com. The significant coverage on the subject does not need to be regarding something that you subjectively deem of greater than "local interest" in order to count as significant coverage. You say that this would allow for "quite literally thousands of similar cases where non-notable high school or collegiate athletes would now meet the notability threshold for an article" – however, the difference here is that the subject also competed professionally at, what I believe is, the highest-level of lacrosse (i.e. he's not just some random local college player like you're making him out to be). Lastly, the ATHLETE "guidelines" are just a garbled mess that few still rely on. Note that NSPORT includes nothing talking about lacrosse, thus even the greatest lacrosse player of all time would still fail it. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:36, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- In this particular case, I think those sources are fairly Run-of-the-Mill coverage.
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:11, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep: Can find news articles referencing above player which seems to be reliable secondary source[1] Krishnpriya123 (talk) 06:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)
- The reference you mentioned is from The Hoya, a student-run school newspaper, and wouldn't really be appropriate for establishing notability in this case. nf utvol (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- It's still an actual print newspaper. Looking at their website, they seem to be somewhat independent of the university. The Hoya source doesn't count for much but it still helps just a tad little bit (when combined with the other sources). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:52, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
- No it doesn't. Per [[1]], The Hoya is funded in part by a student activities fee that all undergraduates attending the university pay, connecting it directly to the university. Let'srun (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- It's still an actual print newspaper. Looking at their website, they seem to be somewhat independent of the university. The Hoya source doesn't count for much but it still helps just a tad little bit (when combined with the other sources). ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:52, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
- The reference you mentioned is from The Hoya, a student-run school newspaper, and wouldn't really be appropriate for establishing notability in this case. nf utvol (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Delete: Subject does not appear to have the requisite WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG and doesn't appear to meet any other notability guideline. The Syracuse.com article is primarily interview prose as it is. Let'srun (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
- Weak keep I found this also although some of it is the same as the first Syarcuse.com link Beanie posted. Here's this additional coverage too though it's not as good. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:18, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
- Delete Not much coverage in more notable publications. Mainly local sources. Article made in 2015 by a single editor who may have been intimate with the subject. Single purpose account. Ramos1990 (talk)
- Locality of sources are irrelevant; one does not need to have coverage in "more notable publications" to have an article. That said, The Philadelphia Inquirer, which covered him, is one of the largest papers in the U.S. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- While that is true, it covered him purely as a local athlete, which is no different than any other local newspaper covering a hometown player. Let'srun (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Delete, I always try and find sources for a Keep. Why delete what someone else has worked hard to create unless you really have to? That is my take at least. In this case, the source simply is not notable and is mostly just re-mentioned in his own school list. Not a reliable, or independent, or secondary source! It stands to be deleted. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
- There's multiple sources that are both reliable, independent, and secondary... BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- What do you mean "the source isn't notable"? ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:47, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)