Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bart Tanski (2nd nomination)


 * 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   no consensus. There is a 5-3 majority for deletion, although the last delete vote comes from a new account and simply makes an assertion of non-notability. Still, the delete side does provide a persuasive argument when they point out that the news coverage of high school sports is fairly routine. On the other hand, I accept that the Ohio Mr. Football award can arguably elevate a player to higher than average notability for a football player, and the keep arguments pointing out (admittedly brief) coverage in media beyond the very local sources have some merit too. I am therefore calling this no consensus. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Bart Tanski

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

"[h]igh school and pre-high school athletes are notable only if they have received, as individuals, substantial and prolonged coverage that is (1) independent of the subject and (2) clearly goes beyond WP:ROUTINE coverage

While the award (Mr. Football Award)is a notable award, Bart Tanski is not. The article states he went to Mentor, won the award, and walked onto Bowling Green. This does not goes beyond WP:ROUTINE coverage in that his notability is restricted to local coverage and sports specific publications, and hardly qualifies as "substantial and prolonged coverage" as it was only around reported around the time period he won the award. -TheRunningDude
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 January 4.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  17:57, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep The first question, regardless of the WP:NSPORT guidelines, is if the article meets WP:GNG. WP:GNG states that if a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.  WP:GNG gives further guidance and it is shown Tanski meets these. 1.  "Significant coverage" that 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. - Upon winning Mr. Football, a number of articles were written about Tanski of which he was directly addressed (e.g., see here and here) as well as more current articles that directly discuss his achievement in a historical contents (e.g., here and here).  It is established that significant coverage is met.  2. "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability. - The above articles are from noted newspapers such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer and Toledo Blade and such they are reliable. 3.  "Sources", for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected. Sources are not required to be available online, and they are not required to be in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability. - Again, Cleveland Plain Dealer and Toledo Blade, among others, count as sources.  Plus, the above articles are from four different Ohio news papers, not just his 'hometown' paper. 4.  "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject or its creator. For example, self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, the subject's website, autobiographies, and press releases are not considered independent.  Yet again, Cleveland Plain Dealer and Toledo Blade are independent of the subject (as opposed to data on the BGSU website). Based on the above, there is a presumption of notability and I think that further analysis (e.g., that he won Mr. Football in Ohio) establish notability. -RonSigPi (talk) 18:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Though the initial argument is weak, I must side with deletion. It would not appear Tanski meets the guideline requirements of either WP:NSPORT or WP:GNG. Much of the (little) coverage of Tanski, such as those given by RonSigPi above, are still local stories wrote at the time of and about Tanksi winning the Mr. Football Award, nothing more, nothing less. The two sole articles written after the fact are rehashes of when he DID win the award. The News Herald covers the northeastern portion of the Greater Cleveland area, where Tanski is from. The supplied 2012 article is a personal routine interview and does not help establish notability. And, despite the title (High school football: Life changed for Bart Tanski after winning Mr. Football) the article seems to focus on a then current Mentor student who was in the running for the award, with Tanski supplementing the story with personal anecdotes and rehashing his 2007 experience.The 2010 Cleveland.com/Plain Dealer article, while certainly a greater reaching paper, is rather short, and again, only rehashes what was known in 2007; he won the award, lost at states, and walked on to Bowling Green. The Medina Gazette is, again, a local north eastern Ohio community publication. The 2007 article provided has strange formatting errors, and a username for an author. Clicking the username "northcoastNOW" leads here. After some research into the supplied email address in the article, I am led to believe this is a blog/commentary post from a freelance blogger rather than a journalistic article.The Toledo Blade article is not local to Tanski, (though it's still Ohio), but only covers a single fact; that he is a high school athlete that won the award.The coverage of Tanski has neither been "substantial and prolonged" to meet WP:NSPORT. Perhaps WP:GNG really shouldn't be used as an alternative to determine notablility, (Tanski's only claim to notability is an award he won for being a good High School athlete ...that is why we have high school guidelines to determine notability in WP:NSPORT) but regardless, his coverage still does not seem significant, nor does the number of sources seem enough given the depth of coverage. Searching brings up nothing else about Tanski other than the already supplied local and somewhat non-local articles stating he won the award. He broke no records or made any significant achievements outside his 2007 high school award. He seems like a fairly typical college student who was a good, though not exceptionally good, high school football player and does not establish significant notability to warrant his own article. -Dorbella
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Some perspective here is important: we are discussing the notability of a high school football player who did not have a significant college career and never played in a professional game.  Any marginal notability of the subject is based solely on his having received Ohio's Mr. Football award as a 17-year-old in 2007.  That's all there is; everything else is filler.  This appears to be exactly the sort of case that the one-event rules were designed to address per WP:ONEEVENT, WP:BIO1E and WP:BLP1E.  In relevant part, WP:BLP1E states


 * "Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. We should generally avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:


 * "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.


 * "If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view.  In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.


 * "It is not the case that the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial and well-documented&mdash;as in the case of John Hinckley, Jr., who shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981."


 * Applying the WP:BLP1E analysis, the subject was covered in the Ohio media solely for having been recognized as "Mr. Football." There is no reliable, independent source coverage beyond that.  All other sources are either blogs or team websites.  The subject is clearly a "low-profile" individual and is not regularly covered by the media, and he is already included in the list of Ohio's Mr. Football award recipients.  There is no relevant information to merge to the list.  And having been recognized as Mr. Football clearly does not rise to the level of historical significance of the example cited.


 * After properly analyzing this article under the WP:BLP1E criteria, the result is a clear "delete." Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. I disagree with the assertion above that WP:BLP1E is a basis for deleting in this case.  That guideline should be invoked to protect otherwise private, living persons where they gain brief notoriety due to their involvement in a single news event such as an isolated involvement in a scandal, escapade, crime, disaster, protest, stunt, etc.  It does not apply to a person being receiving accolades for a sustained period of productivity or accomplishment.  We should not, and need not, stretch the boundaries of BLP1E to conclude that Tanski is not notable.  As noted above, coverage is limited to his playing of "high school" football, and the applicable criterion imposes a higher-than-normal standard of substantial and sustained  coverage for a high school football player to be deemed notable.  I do not see sufficient coverage to satisfy the heightened standard for high school football players. Cbl62 (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep I see a good deal of coverage for this individual in the news, ranging from local and regional articles to USA Today. There should be no question he passes WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep: Per Ron and Paul. - Ret.Prof (talk) 17:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have found nothing to determine notability! Artical would need expanding to qualify for inclusion. Deangunn (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2013 (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.