Bryce Maximus James : If the editor that redirected that article, there is no reason IMHO that is worthy or recreating the article under another name.   It is simply a way to get around an edit they don’t like.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 14:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Bryce James BostonMensa ( talk ) 14:39, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well, it was redirected to LeBron James from 2022 until Today when the redirect was changed.    There are people that are very determined.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 14:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Basketball ,  and Ohio .  Shellwood ( talk ) 15:06, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Did a WP:BEFORE indicate if there was any WP:SIGCOV on the subject?  Alvaldi ( talk ) 15:16, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete coverage is typical of this [18] .  The kid is 15 yrs old, he likely won't be notable until at least college, other than having a famous father, that's about all there is.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:53, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The article from The Sporting News is a secondary source that is independent of the subject, addresses it directly and in detail and is as far as I know from a reliable publication.  That is, it is significant coverage.  That said, GNG requires multiple SIGCOV over a sufficiently significant period of time which might be difficult for him to pass since coverage about him seems to have started around the second half of last year.  As it stands, the best course of action would probably be to move the article to Bryce James (common name) and then redirect it to his father to preserve the article history since there is every indication that he will soon be notable enough to have an article.  Plus, redirects are WP:CHEAP .  Alvaldi ( talk ) 19:42, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'd be ok with a ! redirect, either way, not terribly fussed about either option.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - This article is several years ahead of potential notability besides him being the son of a famous basketball player and potential college player.  conman33 ( . . .talk ) 00:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed.   I’d have to reread the article but IIRC, he hasn’t had  a particularly notable high school basketball career and notability is not inherited.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 02:20, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect - no reason not to.  Rlendog ( talk ) 21:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I don't know what you all are basing your not notable opinions on but I see significant coverage in independent sources cited in the article and I get many other hits in a news search.  If the media is interested, the subject is notable.  ~ Kvng ( talk ) 14:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The most impressive things I see are his Scholarship and his father.   I don’t see anything along the lines of when he was a sophomore, he became his school’s highest scorer, he was the MVP of the state championship tourney and the third leading scorer or rebounder.  What is mentioned, like the scholarship offer, is no different than thousands of other athletes.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 18:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Please specify what makes you think he is more notable than the high school athletes closest to where you live.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 18:36, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] He is more notable than other local high school athletes because he's being reported on by multiple reliable sources.  Sure, not necessarily because of his accomplishments but WP:GNG doesn't care about that.  ~ Kvng ( talk ) 14:54, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Seems flimsy argument at best.   What I see here is he getting this attention because who is father is and I lost track of how many times people have said notability is not inherited.  As far as I am concerned, it is about what he has accomplished, in this case on the basketball court and not the luck of the cosmic drawer on who his father is. I don’t see basketball accomplishments that make him as or more notable than his peers.  23:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC) BostonMensa ( talk ) 23:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You don't seem to disagree that he's received media attention.  Sorry you don't like WP:BASIC .  WP:INHERIT is about subjects that have not received their own coverage but are associated (e.g. by marriage, birth, etc.) with a notable subject.  It certainly does not say that someone associated with a notable subject can't be notable.  ~ Kvng ( talk ) 00:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The media being interested is meaningless re:being notable.  On slow news days or if the News program has 45 seconds to fill, they will cover a double rainbow cross town.   Doesn’t mean it is wikiworthy.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 01:28, 2 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The difference is WP:SUSTAINED coverage.  The double rainbow only gets coverage for a brief period of time.  If the same double rainbow persisted for years and got coverage over that period, that would make it notable.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 22:55, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  16:29, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 🔥 02:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I was hoping we'd turn up other sources at this point.  Still a ! delete, with a smaller ! vote for ~redirect if it goes that way.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 18:01, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not sure why the ! vote for redirect is smaller than for delete.   There is information about him in the LeBron James article and this is a plausible search term.   So even if there is reason not to have a standalone article, I see no reason not to have a redirect.  Rlendog ( talk ) 15:03, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - He looks good to pass WP:GNG, I found this sources [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] Epcc12345 ( talk ) 12:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, 🌶️ Jala peño 🌶️ Don't click this link !  08:31, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as he has received sustained significant coverage in many outlets.  The reason why he's receiving coverage is not relevant to notability.  However, I wouldn't object if the content was merged to LeBron James .  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 22:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources presented by Epcc12345.   More than enough to satisfy GNG.   I would suggest a move to Bryce James also but this is not the correct venue.  Carson Wentz ( talk ) 01:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Too Soon to establish independent notability.  He is 16.  He has not done anything notable yet outside of being born to famous people.  Trillfendi ( talk ) 03:44, 20 June 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.

Discussion outcome: keep