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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can . Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:41, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Etrasco (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)

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this American lacrosse player. JTtheOG (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Massachusetts, and New York. JTtheOG (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Question for JTtheOG are these any good? [1], [2], [3] The second one in particular has a fair amount of information about her. Lookslikely (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. None of the sources above are independent—the first says it is from press releases, and the other two are governing sports orgs. No other coverage turns up beyond press releases, mentions in routine announcements and recaps, and quotations from her in her capacity as an assistant coach. The large majority of the 80 hits on PQ are reprints of the same high school game recaps in local news, which are especially disallowed from counting toward notability. Even her college and national team appearances garnered little more than passing mentions like Danielle Etrasco and Katrina Dowd both had hat tricks; anything beyond that was inevitably coming from the University Wire. JoelleJay (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @JoelleJay Ok. Thank you. I am trying to get the hang of this and genuinely was asking if the sources I came across counted before I voted. Your reply will help me greatly going forward. With this clarification regarding the sources I came up with I will now vote Delete as everything else I saw I knew was not sufficient as they were all brief mentions and match report type stuff. Lookslikely (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2025 (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.