Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Olson


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure)  TheSpecialUser TSU 01:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Ben Olson

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Does not appear to meet WP:NGRIDIRON or WP:GNG Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 04:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 04:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Paul McDonald (talk) 13:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. College football players who receive significant non-trivial coverage in mainstream media sources pass WP:GNG.  If they receive such coverage in national media outlets, they also pass WP:NCOLLATH.  Although either one suffices, Olson appears to have received enough coverage to pass both standards.  He also played at the highest level of the college sports as the starting quarterback at UCLA and was named the AT&T All-America Player of the Week for the opening week of the 2007 season.   Examples of coverage include: (1) Sports Illustrated feature on Olson, (2) Los Angeles Daily News feature on Olson, (3) Orange County Register feature on Olson, (4) Deseret News, (5) Deseret News, (6) AOL News, (7) ESPN, ESPN, (8) ESPN, (9) CBS Sports, (10) MSNBC, (11) Los Angeles Times, (12) Los Angeles Times, (13) Los Angeles Times, (14) Los Angeles Times,  (15) Honolulu Advertiser, (16) Seattle Times, (17) USA Today, (18) Bruin Report Online. Cbl62 (talk) 05:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears to pass WP:GNG. References should be added to the article, but that's an editing issue not a deletion issue.--

. Northamerica1000(talk) 03:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:BASIC & WP:GNG. Reading some of the sources provided above by User:Cbl62 confirms this. Examples:, , , ,


 * Keep. The subject is not entitled to a presumption of notability per WP:NCOLLATH or WP:NGRIDIRON, but probably satisfies WP:GNG based on the coverage in two of the article's three sourced footnotes aloneand that's before I started to review Cbl62's list of sources above.  While this article raises an interesting question of whether or not the subject rises to the level of encyclopedic significance for inclusion, as long as Wikipedia continues to define "notability" in the manner in which it does, many college football quarterbacks of no particular accomplishments will continue to have stand-alone Wikipedia articles simply because of the volume of coverage that they receive.  Subjectively evaluated, there's little that recommends his inclusion: he was a part-time starter with a history of season-ending injuries, middle-of-the-road passing statistics, no championships, and no national awards.  It's one of the glaring flaws of Wikipedia's notability standard, but that's a policy discussion for another day.  In all events, his infobox should be reverted to that of a college football player (not NFL player), as his notability, such as it is, is based entirely on his history as a CFB player, not his non-existent NFL career.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Notability is a cruel mistress indeed.--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * . No flaw exposed here. GNG works fine.  Standard should not be higher for athletes than businessmen or entertainers. Cbl62 (talk) 04:31, 6 September 2012 (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.