Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Gill

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 delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Gill

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

Fails WP:NBOX No major amateur or professional championship, no top ten ranking in his weight class by WBA, etc Rogermx (talk) 01:05, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 03:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 03:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Boxing-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 03:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 03:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. He fought for area titles twice and won a British Masters title, but his wins were all over journeymen or boxers who had lost most of their fights. Not enough coverage around to satisfy WP:GNG. --Michig (talk) 09:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per above. Does not meet WP:NBOX.PRehse (talk) 13:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to meet WP:NBOX and lacks the significant independent coverage to meet WP:GNG. Papaursa (talk) 01:25, 16 January 2018 (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.