Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Baumann


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 11:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Albert Baumann
Really, is an article about a shooter who placed 8th in the Olympics a century ago really notable? Pal5017 04:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that there is a category for 1896 Olympic shooters, and most of them are even less notable than this guy, as in they didnt finish the competition or their finishing place was not known. I am adding those as we speak, so please do not point that out as some sort of double standard.--Pal5017 04:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Note - 26 of the 39 articles in that category have been linked to this deletion at this point. -- Jonel | Speak 05:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I tried to add those names, but my list was lost, and Im not about to redo it. Either way, the others are even less notable than Baumann. They have no dates of birth or death, most only have one name given, and most of their finishes are not known at all, or atleast only to the extent that they didnt finish very high. If there was more biographical information known, or they received a medal, I would say differently, but as it is now, they didnt, so I continue to support my AfD.--Pal5017 05:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete . Keep per TBC The name could be added to a list of shooters, but no way does this person deserve his own article. YellowPigNowNow 04:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. All Olympians are notable.  There's plenty of precedent.  Articles for deletion/Lecomte is the most recent one I'm aware of. -- Jonel | Speak 04:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, Clearly, Albert Baumann is more notable than Nidorino, so if Nidorino gets its own page, why the heck can't Albert Baumann? But seriously, anyone who participated in the Olympics (regardless of rank), can be qualified for a Wikipedia article. As quoted from WP:BIO, "Sportspeople who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in an individual professional sport, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports, including college sports in the United States."-- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 04:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point. I'm changing my vote YellowPigNowNow 05:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm inclined to support "keep", but it should be noted that the fact of one's competing in the Olympics in 1896 (or even 1900, 1904, or 1908) surely doesn't resolve the question of notability as might the fact of one's competing in, say, the Athens or Turin Games. Importantly, few countries participated in the first several iterations of the Modern Olympics, and, in some cases, all competitors in a given event hailed from the host country.  One's participating, then, didn't necessarily mean that he/she was at the top of his/her sport internationally, only that he/she was in the right place at the right time (see, e.g., Tennis at the 1896 Summer Olympics, where the singles competition was won by an Irishman on vacation in Greece who was entered by a friend on a whim and where the doubles competition was won by that Irishman and his first-round singles opponent, who was at the games to compete in athletics).  While medalling in an Olympic event is notable per se (such that the Irishman, John Pius Boland, irrespective of his competition at the Games or of his general tennis history, merits an article), it is probably fair to say that an athlete who competed in the an early Summer Games is not necessarily notable solely for his/her having participated.  It's a close call, though, and I certainly understand that some may think it best to consider participation in the Olympics as passing a bright-line rule.  Joe 05:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep as per my strenuous argument in Articles for deletion/Lecomte. I wouldn't go as far as Jonel though, but top ten finishes are most definitely strong enough.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per TBC. Roy  boy cr ash  fan  [[Image:Flag of Texas.svg|30px]] 05:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per TBC and Jonel. Sue Anne 05:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, about ten thousand athletes have competed in each recent summer Olympic games and about three thousand in each winter games. I don't think that they are all notable enough for an article. I think that the medal winners is enough. -- Kjkolb 14:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per TBC. --Ter e nce Ong 14:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not everyone gets to be in the Olympics. Should a person who placed 8th in the Olympics last year have their article deleted in 100 years for no particular reason except that 100 is a big number? &mdash; 0918 BRIAN &bull; 2006-04-5 19:06
 * Keep or better still put the info with other similar figures in an article and use the page as a redirect. It should be possible to search for any Olympic athlete on Wiki and find something about them. It's history and historical information is valid. Tyrenius 01:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep' When I go to the Olympics maybe I'll think different, but I think anyone who goes to the Olympics passes the [WP:KIT] - Any Olympian including Albert Baumann is more notable than Nidorino [or any other random Pokémon, so if Nidorino gets its own page, then Albert Baumann gets his own page. : ) Lonesomedovechocolate 02:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. &mdash;-- That Guy, From That Show!  (talk) 2006-04-06 04:00Z 
 * Keep All Olympic competitors. Scranchuse 04:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per kjkolb. Fishhead64 05:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep As I wrote in my comment above, participation in an early edition of the modern Olympics didn't necessarily denote anything about a participant's athletic proficiency; many participants in the first few modern iterations weren't athletes by trade and weren't required to qualify in the contemporary sense, such that one can't infer anything about an athlete's general level of participation in international (such as it was) or national competition from the fact of his/her participation in the Olympics. That said, I am inclined to think that participation qua participation is sufficient to establish notability, and that, given the difficulties one would have in establishing which of the "modern Olympics" should be treated with the reverence with which we treat "recent 'modern Olympics'", it is perhaps best that we err on the side of including any participants for whom any information is available.  Joe 05:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete &mdash; content might qualify as a footnote on another article, or as part of a list, but this article not notable as written -- Argon233 T  @ C  &para; U <b style="color:#00Ff00; font-size:larger;">&ang;</b> 06:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per past precedent; all Olympic competitors seem to clearly qualify under the criteria for sportspeople, since there isn't a level of competition in their sports higher than the Olympics. This seems like a textbook "Wikipedia is not paper" situation. -Colin Kimbrell 16:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * 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.