Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russ Laribee (3rd nomination)

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russ Laribee

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Non-notable baseball player who never made it above Triple-A. He once held the record for most times striking out in a game (since broken by Khalil Lee), but the game in question has its own page at Longest professional baseball game and Laribee's record can be covered there. O.N.R. ^(talk) 17:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball. O.N.R. ^(talk) 17:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I am finding coverage to meet GNG, for example [1] [2] [3] [4] [5], besides coverage of his record setting game, where he got a lot of coverage, such as in this book. Just because his record was broken is not reason to delete (in fact, if we cover his record in the game article we should at least retain a redirect from here). Rlendog (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sources provided by Rlendog all meet the WP:GNG, along with [[6]]. Let'srun (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Reliable sources and a book demonstrate sufficient coverage to meet the General Notability Guideline (GNG). Additionally, the player's record-setting game received notable attention, as evident in the coverage. The fact that his record was later broken does not diminish the historical significance of his achievement, and retaining information about him in a dedicated article is justified. Therefore, deletion is unwarranted, and the article should be kept based on the established notability criteria."KarKuZoNga (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am almost sure that this is an AI-generated summary of the comments above. See this user's other AfD contributions and all of them are just summaries of other's comments written in a very AI style. GraziePrego (talk) 05:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Summarizing comment doesn't make it ai. Not sure about your point. If you have issue with my Keep vote and its justification please give proper argument to oppose that. KarKuZoNga (talk) 10:45, 25 January 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.