499:. The text purports to be about a test, yet this is a test that was distinctly not notable when it was ostensibly used and is still not notable enough now. There are only two scientific research-papers, one dated 1993, and one 2006, extant about the subject. The rest are explanations of the term in sports websites (
557:
article, for example, was a couple paragraphs that covered it fairly superficially; neither the
Maitland et al. nor the Bayar et al. articles were actually about the test and focused on its role as a generic isokinetic testing system; Cowboyswire mentions it exactly once in a list of others; USA
248:
This article has no sources and its only links are to a seemingly defunct website disguised as official information about the NFL combine and the website of the manufacturer of the machinery used to carry out the Cybex test. This is a thinly veiled advertisement for that company's work and the
477:
I'm not sure I agree that those constitute sufficient coverage. The last two only mention the test in passing, and the two scholarly articles refer to the test only as the apparatus that happens to be used for those medical examinations. The first one is the only one that covers the test in
320:
I would say this subject is a pretty niche test when it comes to the grand scheme of NFL player recruitment, and even more niche in terms of
Knowledge as a whole. If this content is kept, I feel it might be better to merge it with another article than to retain a standalone article. –
478:
sufficient depth, and even then its scope is limited. AfD may not be a substitute for cleanup, but if no one is willing to perform that cleanup, how long can we justifiably allow an article with unsubstantiated notability to remain on the encyclopaedia? –
558:
Today mentions it once in a long article not about or related to the test. There is certainly no long-term notability. I have been unable to find actual substantial non-trivial secondary coverage in reliable sources. Best,
436:
Would you mind providing some of the sources you've found that indicate this topic's notability? It's all well and good saying it, but if you can't prove it, the closing admin should probably ignore your comments. –
217:
455:
463:, etc. Many more but I really don't have time to be posting hundreds of links here right now when you can Google it yourself. These include scholarly papers, news articles, etc. Clearly sufficient.
264:
170:
211:
515:
the eponymous machine that was used for the test, whereby the machine & the-company-producing-it are also non-notable. The fact that the text was uploaded by a
504:
458:
306:
Found a lot of stuff online in the news and third party sources about this, seems to have significant coverage. Article needs editing, but AFD is not cleanup.--
284:
117:
461:
102:
508:
65:
177:
97:
90:
17:
143:
138:
372:
Article has notability but isn't really fit to stay on the project as-is because it has no sources. Send to draft space via
351:
In that case, as I requested below, I think it would be nice to see some examples of this extensive coverage of the test. –
147:
232:
199:
511:), in which the subject is name dropped precisely once. This is hardly enough for a Knowledge article. All it does is
130:
111:
107:
580:
393:
601:
419:
40:
60:
553:(or merge/redirect as appropriate). The provided sources, in my view, don't constitute in-depth coverage. The
193:
503:) that explain everything sports-related under the sun, and a couple of news articles, one about scouting (
342:
311:
597:
468:
427:
404:
36:
189:
584:
545:
528:
485:
472:
444:
431:
408:
384:
358:
346:
328:
315:
295:
276:
256:
72:
382:
134:
524:
482:
441:
355:
325:
272:
253:
225:
55:
239:
126:
78:
541:
338:
307:
288:
86:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
596:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
464:
423:
512:
377:
373:
205:
574:
520:
479:
438:
352:
322:
268:
250:
516:
334:
500:
449:
537:
164:
452:
568:
560:
592:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
249:
article seems to have no particular encyclopaedic relevance. –
396:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
160:
156:
152:
265:
list of
American football-related deletion discussions
224:
402:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
604:). No further edits should be made to this page.
283:Note: This discussion has been included in the
263:Note: This discussion has been included in the
238:
8:
118:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
285:list of Sports-related deletion discussions
282:
262:
418:As others have said, it's notable, and
7:
507:) and one about injured athletes (
24:
103:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
337:is a really good standard.--
93:(AfD)? Read these primers!
621:
585:03:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
546:20:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
529:16:35, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
385:04:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
329:06:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
316:03:53, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
296:13:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
277:13:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
257:13:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
73:04:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
486:23:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
473:20:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
445:15:00, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
432:12:35, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
409:16:03, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
359:22:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
347:19:12, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
594:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
422:so it should be kept.
333:That may be true, but
91:Articles for deletion
536:nothing notworthy!
420:AFD is not cleanup
567:
411:
298:
279:
108:Guide to deletion
98:How to contribute
612:
565:
517:kamikaze account
407:
401:
399:
397:
380:
293:
243:
242:
228:
180:
168:
150:
88:
68:
63:
58:
34:
620:
619:
615:
614:
613:
611:
610:
609:
608:
602:deletion review
519:doesn't help. -
412:
403:
392:
390:
378:
289:
185:
176:
141:
125:
122:
85:
82:
66:
61:
56:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
618:
616:
607:
606:
588:
587:
548:
531:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
400:
389:
388:
387:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
300:
299:
280:
246:
245:
182:
121:
120:
115:
105:
100:
83:
81:
76:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
617:
605:
603:
599:
595:
590:
589:
586:
582:
579:
576:
573:
570:
563:
562:
556:
552:
549:
547:
543:
539:
535:
532:
530:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
498:
495:
487:
484:
481:
476:
475:
474:
470:
466:
462:
459:
456:
453:
450:
448:
447:
446:
443:
440:
435:
434:
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
414:
413:
410:
406:
405:North America
398:
395:
386:
383:
381:
375:
371:
368:
360:
357:
354:
350:
349:
348:
344:
340:
339:Paul McDonald
336:
332:
331:
330:
327:
324:
319:
318:
317:
313:
309:
308:Paul McDonald
305:
302:
301:
297:
294:
292:
286:
281:
278:
274:
270:
266:
261:
260:
259:
258:
255:
252:
241:
237:
234:
231:
227:
223:
219:
216:
213:
210:
207:
204:
201:
198:
195:
191:
188:
187:Find sources:
183:
179:
175:
172:
166:
162:
158:
154:
149:
145:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
123:
119:
116:
113:
109:
106:
104:
101:
99:
96:
95:
94:
92:
87:
80:
77:
75:
74:
71:
70:
69:
64:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
593:
591:
577:
571:
559:
554:
550:
533:
496:
415:
391:
369:
303:
291:CAPTAIN RAJU
290:
247:
235:
229:
221:
214:
208:
202:
196:
186:
173:
84:
57:bibliomaniac
54:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
465:Smartyllama
424:Smartyllama
212:free images
379:Swordman97
127:Cybex test
79:Cybex test
598:talk page
555:SportsRec
521:The Gnome
376:for now.
269:Shellwood
37:talk page
600:or in a
394:Relisted
374:WP:ATD-I
370:Draftify
171:View log
112:glossary
39:or in a
538:Gritmem
513:promote
218:WP refs
206:scholar
144:protect
139:history
89:New to
551:Delete
534:Delete
497:Delete
335:WP:GNG
190:Google
148:delete
50:delete
561:Kevin
233:JSTOR
194:books
178:Stats
165:views
157:watch
153:links
16:<
569:L235
542:talk
525:talk
509:here
505:here
501:here
469:talk
428:talk
416:Keep
343:talk
312:talk
304:Keep
273:talk
226:FENS
200:news
161:logs
135:talk
131:edit
566:aka
483:Jay
480:Pee
442:Jay
439:Pee
356:Jay
353:Pee
326:Jay
323:Pee
254:Jay
251:Pee
240:TWL
169:– (
583:)
544:)
527:)
471:)
460:,
457:,
454:,
451:,
430:)
345:)
314:)
287:.
275:)
267:.
220:)
163:|
159:|
155:|
151:|
146:|
142:|
137:|
133:|
52:.
581:c
578:·
575:t
572:·
564:(
540:(
523:(
467:(
426:(
341:(
310:(
271:(
244:)
236:·
230:·
222:·
215:·
209:·
203:·
197:·
192:(
184:(
181:)
174:·
167:)
129:(
114:)
110:(
67:5
62:1
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.