Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannah Handeland

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 delete. Aoidh (talk) 05:51, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hannah Handeland (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)

Football player on an amateur third tier. No significant sources in the article, only primary and databases, and what sources exist about such a low tier is not significant coverage anyway. To clarify, it's as significant as coverage about the next-door high school track meet. Geschichte (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sports, Football, and Norway. SanemAyhan07 (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:19, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, does not have SIGCOV. --Mvqr (talk) 13:21, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Walt Yoder (talk) 17:06, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - This Aftenposten article appears to potentially be in-depth coverage (some elements of an interview, but it has a byline and what looks like independent coverage), but it's paywalled. Does anyone with access have the ability to paste some of the contents here so we can evaluate it? Thank you. Jogurney (talk) 20:01, 30 March 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.