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 no consensus. Randykitty (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Tyra Black (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NTENNIS: She has only won one title that has a prize money higher than $15,000, and she did not reach a W60 final. Timothytyy (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets GNG thanks to sources such as [1] [2] [3]. A lot of the coverage is derived from her sister Tornado Alicia Black, so if you disagree on GNG, we should merge as an alternative to deleting). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iffy (talk • contribs) 11:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Iffy Firstly, please sign off when you are giving a comment. Secondly, the player does not have any significant achievements that allows her to have separate article (see NTENNIS). I agree that merging is a good way, but just FYI her sister's article is very close to failing NTENNIS as well.
    For the biography section, the information is very unimportant (such as matches in W15 tournaments), poorly written and not neutral at all. It just seems that her friends wrote it rather than an encyclopedia.
    If you are still not sure here are the notability guidelines for tennis players:
    • Winner of an ITF tournament that has a prize money more than $50,000 (the sisters didn't achieve this)
    • Winner of a Junior Grand Slam (not achieved either)
    • Participant in the main draw of high-level tournaments (achieved by Tornado, not by Hurricane; this is the only reason that I did not nominate Tornado's article for deletion)
  • Thirdly, enough sources doesn't mean that the person is notable; the sources are just about the small tournaments and doesn't have any reference value.
    • Source 1: About an under-18 ITF tournament (not notable)
    • Source 2: I don't see her name in it.
    • Source 3: Just about her name. Timothytyy (talk) 13:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Apologies, this is what source 2 was meant to link to: [4]. The URL changed when I scrolled down to the bottom of the page. Also, tennis players don't have to meet NTENNIS to have biographies, they can be notable for other reasons or merely for receiving significant coverage in the tennis media a lot (regardless of their achievements). Finally, the currently quality of an article is not a reason to keep or delete the article (WP:NOTCLEANUP). Iffy★Chat -- 13:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Source 4 is about a junior Grand Slam quarterfinal, which is not presumed as notable. Can you please tell me what is the significance of these three sources (1,3,4) that contributes to the notability of the article? Is it just because her name is special and her sister is a tennis player as well? I mentioned the quality of the article not because it is a reason for deletion, but because I want to show that the career information about the player is limited (relying on statistical pages as sources), and the creator of this article might not understand the guidelines of an article. Timothytyy (talk) 13:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Per WP:GNG, I think she is notable because she received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The level of the tournament doesn't matter for GNG, what matters is that the coverage of the player is significant and that the source is a reliable one. Iffy★Chat -- 14:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per guidelines and scant coverage this is not really a notable player. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for same reasons as above. --Leonstojka (talk) 05:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:07, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets GNG. with [5], this [6] and this [7]. Should also be kept to be sure we cover gender diversity/minority groups in wiki. Oaktree b (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'm going to do some research on this subject, and plan to vote once the research is done later today. Tails Wx 13:19, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, looks like she meets GNG. Tails Wx 14:29, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 13:24, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. There is plenty of WP:SIGCOV to establish the subject as notable according to WP:GNG and WP:NATHLETE, not to mention WP:NTENNIS. Shawn Teller (talk) 05:10, 17 February 2023 (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.