This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state). 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:

1. 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.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Georgia (U.S. state)|~~~~}} 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 Georgia (U.S. state). 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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Georgia (U.S. state)/archive

Scan for Georgia (U.S. state) AfDs Scan for Georgia (U.S. state) Prods Scan for Georgia (U.S. state) template TfDs

Zach Peterson (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)

I am unable to find any coverage of this assistant basketball coach to meet WP:GNG, other than a few sentences on team-specific blogs (1). JTtheOG (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Basketball. JTtheOG (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I also couldn't find any coverage of Peterson individually. Esolo5002 (talk) 01:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California, Georgia (U.S. state), North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Gronik (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 page should be deleted as the person does not seem largely relevant. Searching his name shows a stark lack of coverage after he dropped out of the 2018 Wisconsin gubernatorial election. Additionally, the page itself seems suspect and contains what I read as promotional material and reads as a piece written in support of Gronik, which is backed up by the fact that one of the primary editor to the page had most of their edits labeled with "possible unreferenced addition to BLP" and various instances vandalism and unreferenced BLP edits being reverted. Talthiel (talk) 21:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Wisconsin. Shellwood (talk) 22:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Happy to be corrected if I'm misunderstanding the relevant notability guideline here, but my understanding is that coverage of an unsuccessful candidate's campaign can still be counted towards WP:GNG even though being an unsuccessful candidate doesn't count towards WP:NPOL. It seems like he got quite a bit of SIGCOV associated with his campaign, going well beyond the kind of passing mentions any random candidate could expect to get ([1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]). Agree that a lot of the material about his business career needs to go as it is promotional and unsourced (although there are some passing mentions of him as a businessman that could be used here), but I think he probably meets WP:GNG based on the coverage associated with him as a candidate. MCE89 (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect. I'm persuaded by the arguments below, and after looking at the coverage again I don't think it's that much more than any random unsuccessful candidate could expect to get by default. A redirect to 2018 Wisconsin gubernatorial election seems reasonable. MCE89 (talk) 03:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the election in which he ran - I'm not sure he's otherwise notable, and he can be adequately covered there. The above argument is flawed since if you only receive GNG coverage for being in an election, we cover you on the election page. SportingFlyer T·C 23:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not necessarily opposed to this, but looking at the election article this would amount to "Andy Gronik, businessman (still on ballot; endorsed Kelda Roys)" — I don't think any of the other material could realistically be covered within the election article. I think there's enough coverage in reliable sources of specific biographical information and scandals associated with his campaign (particularly [10] [11] [12]), as well as some coverage of his business career, that would be lost if we were to redirect. And AFAIK there's no notability guideline that says that receiving GNG coverage for being an election candidate means you must be covered on the election page? MCE89 (talk) 00:21, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    The business career stuff is completely unsourced, though. I simply don't see him as notable outside his losing campaign, and I don't see his campaign as particularly notable. Again we have a long history of if you only have campaign coverage and you lose, you get redirected unless some special circumstance applies. SportingFlyer T·C 01:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:TNT. Just looking at the formatting of random links makes me think that this isn't an article, but rather a bulletin board. I'm not opposed to a redirect. Bearian (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and/or redirect. Every candidate in every election everywhere can always show some evidence of campaign coverage, so the existence of campaign coverage does not give a non-winning candidate a "passes GNG and is therefore exempted from NPOL" card — if that were how it worked, then every candidate would always get that card and NPOL itself would be meaningless and unenforceable. So the notability test for an unelected political candidate is not just "has campaign coverage", and requires that either (a) they can show credible and properly sourced evidence that they were already notable enough for a Wikipedia article on other grounds independently of their candidacy, or (b) they can show credible and properly sourced evidence that their candidacy should be seen as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other people's candidacies, in some way that would pass the ten year test for enduring significance. Neither of those criteria have been shown here, however. GNG is not just "anybody who has had or surpassed X number of media hits in any context whatsoever" — even the context in which a GNG-worthy hit exists still has to pass the relevant SNGs at the same time, rather than exempting the person from the SNG. Bearcat (talk) 18:48, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Professor Backwards (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)

Delete per WP:TNT. Been tagged since 2009 and nobody has pitched in. So many issues in this article, including the use of many quotes with no supporting attributed sources of potentially copyrighted materials. (his jokes probably are copyrighted and these quotes are likely copyright infringements unless we give attribution). The only source used is an SNL transcript which is a primary source. There's unsubstantiated claims of varying kinds that require a source because of the nature of the claim. This person is notable but the article requires a complete rewrite. Best to blow this up and start over from scratch.4meter4 (talk) 02:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Entertainment, and Georgia (U.S. state). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and per not WP:NOTQUOTE Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets WP:GNG, he has sources on him in Newspapers.com, Professor Backwards To Entertain At Taylorville Country Club Stag (The Taylorville Daily Breeze Courier), Prof. Backwards (Nosdnomde) Staging Swohs Twice Nightly (The Morning Call), Professor Backward Hit With 'drawkcaB' Actions (The Commercial Appeal), Professor Backwards Comes To Greenville (The Greenville News) and Professor's Murder Predictable (The Greenville News). It doesn't have to be deleted, it could still be rewritten in the same article. MoviesandTelevisionFan (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We might have to get an admin to redact the copyright infringed material from the article history if you want to pursue this option.4meter4 (talk) 06:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - for goodness' sake, his murder made SNL's Weekend Update. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability was never the issue here. The article had copyright infringement violations and was entirely unreferenced (although much of that was gutted after it was brought to AFD). This was a WP:TNT nomination.4meter4 (talk) 03:55, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I should mention that this article has really been gutted including all of the details of his passing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:38, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Plenty of coverage, this in a newspaper from the 50s, [13], also with everything else cited in the other comments. Oaktree b (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cayden Lee (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)

I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage of this college football player to meet WP:GNG. There is this routine story on his college choice and a couple mentions here. Both are by the same author from The Clarion-Ledger, so they would count as one source even if they were SIGCOV. There are also pieces from team-specific blogs written by non-notable sportswriters such as this piece by a writing intern from Ole Miss Rebels on SI, this piece by a longtime team blogger from The Ole Miss Spirit, or this piece by an Ole Miss senior from The Rebel Walk. JTtheOG (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, American football, Georgia (U.S. state), and Mississippi. JTtheOG (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify. I kind of expected more coverage, since he seems to have had decent stats so far for Ole Miss (a big program). However, he is still young (only a sophomore) and it seems he's poised to be Ole Miss's top receiver next year (per this, albeit a FanSided blog), so there will almost certainly be more coverage of him in the near future. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That's a good point. 57 catches for almost 900 yards and two tuddys is not a bad year at all, especially in the SEC. I was surprised as well. JTtheOG (talk) 21:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That's modern sports journalism for you. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 21:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify: Like others, I was surprised that I couldn't find more coverage about the subject, but that is the way it goes sometimes. Draftify this for the time being as there should be more coverage at some point, it just isn't here now. Let'srun (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. 900 receiving yards for Lee in 2024 at a major progam. That would make him a star at most programs, but Tre Harris is the Rebels No. 1 receiver and probably dominated the coverage. I did find some coverage for Lee and would expect there to be more. See [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. Cbl62 (talk) 01:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Here's one I found. Part of it is paywalled but it looks like SIGCOV from the part I can see. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 02:48, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Here's the full version, which is probably SIGCOV. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:19, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glokk40Spaz (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)

Fails WP:GNG. Launchballer 01:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -Charitably it is too soon. In his first AfD about a year ago, he got one "weak keep" vote because he is signed to Columbia Records, but that is not enough. He is listed at the company website: [20], but with no supporting info ("Read More" leads nowhere). I can find no information from the label about any promotion of his releases or if they even released anything by him yet, despite what this article says. Meanwhile, he has no coverage in reliable music media and his stuff remains self-released on the usual platforms. Good luck to him if that big label puts in some effort, but nothing has yet happened to generate material for an article here. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I've found some coverage in reliable sources: [21][22][23][24]. Still not sure if it's enough to meet WP:MUSICBIO though. मल्ल (talk) 19:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, already brought to AFD. not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is more support out there for Deletion. It would also be nice to get another review of sources recently brought to this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - the HipHopDX and HNHH sources make this scrape past GNG. SK2242 (talk) 07:21, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: According to https://www.hiphopdx.com/contactus, Managers, Publicists & PR Professionals are encouraged to reach out to request coverage of the artist they represent, so I don't think we should count HipHopDX as an independent secondary source, and not an indication of notability. The rest doesn't seem to be quite enough to establish notability either. Falls a bit short of having significant independent coverage, I think. Mlkj (talk) 23:22, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:MUSICBIO. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]