Talk:Carl Pelini

Brandon Jones incident
I don't think we need that little section. Describing an incident like that without telling the reader why that is important to the article, or in the person's life, is not necessary. If he had a history of temper problems, we gave that (cited) fact, and used this debacle as an example, I wouldn't mind it. As it is, it comes across as trying to disparage the guy. Macae, is there a specific reason or policy you cite for having this section kept?  Nolelover  It's football season!  15:48, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:3RR Please see the "Three Revert Rule"--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:00, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * As an assistanct coach, this individual rarely receives any press positive or negative. This camera incident received quite a bit of news coverage from numerous media outlets and was a good indication as to the frustration that this coach felt following the Cornhusker's loss to A&M.  As perhaps the most covered and discussed event of the year for this subject, I believe that it is relevant to the article.  It is not meant to disparage and could just as easily be seen as evidence of the passion in this coach.   I am not sure how to present one or the other however without providing inappropriate POV and instead left the facts in the article without offering further opinion.  If you would like to clarify the story further, the assistance is most appreciated!   User:Macae 11:04, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * User:cmadler has moved the section here, and that's where it belongs. Otherwise, we are putting WP:UNDUE weight on a one-time incident. There is no explanation why the incident is so big and important to his career. Without that, it should remain at the game's section within the season article.  Nolelover  It's football season!  17:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion
I nominated this article for proposed deletion because I do not beleive that the subject passes notability standards as an assistant coach (see essay WP:CFBCOACH for details). Certainly his brother Bo Pelini as the head coach passes.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:51, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I've seconded the proposed deletion. I agree that his career does not create a presumption of notability, and I don't believe there is adequate non-trivial coverage from reliable independent sources to meet the general notability guideline. Mention of the Pelini-Jones incident should be at 2010 Nebraska Cornhuskers football team, and I've added it there. cmadler (talk) 17:09, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with deletion of this article. The only reason I would hesitate is because I believe that he will become a head coach soon and achieve notability standard.  At that point, the information contained in this article will be useful.    User:Macae 11:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * My position is keep, at least until we have a better policy on assistant coaches. This one garnered attention here specifically because the subject was in the news.  We've got slews of other assistant coach biography articles for top-tier college football programs that have less notable subjects than this one.  Guys like Carl Pelini at programs like Nebraska are routinely talked about on national television during games and in sports new shows.  I'm not sure what qualifies as "trivial" coverage per Cmadler above.  It's sports.  It's kind of all trivial. ;) Jweiss11 (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Several things would help this article in that regard. If a reliable source has mentioned or speculated about him as a head coach candidate, add it to the article with a citation, and that would strengthen the argument in favor of keeping. Also, this article generally lacks citations to reliable independent sources; it only has one, which only mentions that while all Nebraska football coaches got raises from 2009 to 2010, Pelini got the largest raise of any assistant. It also mentions that Tennessee contacted him about taking the same position (DC) there, which doesn't give strong credence to the idea that he'll soon be a head coach; it would have meant a pay hike, but would probably be considered a lateral move (DC to DC) or maybe even a downward move (Nebraska football > Tennessee football recently). cmadler (talk) 20:24, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Blasphemy! :) And I would !vote keep as well. Regardless of that one essay, Carl appears to pass the WP:GNG. Significant national news coverage of him from reliable sources certainly hasn't been trivial. I'll look into improving the article.  Nolelover  It's football season!  20:32, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG says "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material. Examples: The 360-page book by Sobel and the 528-page book by Black on IBM are plainly non-trivial. The one sentence mention by Walker of the band Three Blind Mice in a biography of Bill Clinton  is plainly trivial. cmadler (talk) 21:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per Jweiss11's logic Oldag07 (talk) 05:32, 25 December 2010 (UTC)