Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molly Kingsbury
Fails |GNG and Wikipedia:Notability (sports). There is a lack of |notability because of a lack of sourcing. To me there is something wrong with the idea of supporting the creation (or the keeping) of an undersourced  using mainly |primary sources that produces a stub |pseudo biography. "Just" making an appearance at a national or international event, leading to a stand-alone article on Wikipedia, is dependant on Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. rimary|Primary sources do not advance notability so secondary sources are required. Usually placing 4th or 6th place may create some immediate fame but notability is not fleeting or passing. Only the individual, family, team members, or Wikiprojects will remember someone placing 4th or 6th. This seems to be forgotten sometimes in a quest to have all possible subjects covered on Wikipedia. This subject has three references and two are primary with one (BBC) secondary for the one event. This lack of sourcing fails several instances of the |"Five pillars": ''"All encyclopedia#characteristics|articles must strive for Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable accuracy, |citing |reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|living persons"'', so these watered down exemptions ("it fails several policies or guidelines but passes WP:NTRACK so we should keep") should not matter
— User:Otr500, 05:33, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:BLP||WP:PSEUDO||WP:P||WP:5P2||WP:CS||WP:RS||WP:notability||WP:primary (Wikipedia:Notability)