Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WakeyLeaks

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. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 15:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WakeyLeaks

[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 neologism for a college footbal scandal Andre🚐 03:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and United States of America. Andre🚐 03:51, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The scandal itself is clearly notable with cited significant coverage from The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Athletic, ESPN, etc. over multiple years and comparisons to other notable college football scandals. The scandal is called "Wakeyleaks" in each and every article and has become the common name for the controversy.

PK-WIKI (talk) 08:08, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to 2016 Wake Forest Demon Deacons football team#Leaks of plays where it's covered in more detail and actually explained. There's definitely reliable sources, but the article is a single sentence long and doesn't appear significant enough (long term) and seems better suited to be a part of the season article. If the event were more significant in terms of long term impact, I'd propose redirecting to Wake Forest Demon Deacons football. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
AfD is WP:NOTCLEANUP.

Additionally, the Wakeyleaks scandal (not the 2016 season) still has articles being written about it in 2023 that show the long-term significance vis-à-vis other events such as the Michigan Wolverines football sign-stealing scandal.

PK-WIKI (talk) 17:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep article certainly needs some fleshing out, but the scandal is notable and worthy of its own page. LEPRICAVARK (talk) 00:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject easily meets the WP:GNG and is WP:SUSTAINED per the sources provided by PK-WIKI. The article does need some work but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. If the decision is against keeping, I'd recommend a redirect to Wake Forest Demon Deacons football as a WP:ATD. User:Let'srun 14:28, 25 December 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.