Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big East Conference Men's Basketball Rookie of the Year


 * 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) Logan Talk Contributions 00:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Big East Conference Men's Basketball Rookie of the Year

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The line needs to be drawn somewhere with college basketball "awards". Players and coaches of the year in Division I conference are definitely notable, as they represent the best overall in their respective designations. If we start going into "Rookie of the Year", it will snowball into Defensive Player of the Year, Sixth Man of the Year, etc. These awards are overkill. Jrcla2 (talk) 20:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * DUAL NOMINATION: I am also nominating Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Rookie of the Year for the same reasons. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:00, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep times two. Well-done articles that meet the standards for Wikipedia lists, at a minimum. WP:IDONTLIKEIT is a poor rationale for nomination for deletion. Carrite (talk) 22:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I was waiting for someone to use "I don't like it" to blanket my nomination. I provided reasoned arguments with logic, not "this is stoopid it shouldnt be on wikipedia lolz". Besides, if you want to argue semantics, ALL deletion nominations can be boiled down to IDONTLIKEIT. Jrcla2 (talk) 22:28, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - There wasn't long to wait, eh? The line needs to be drawn somewhere... These awards are overkill. That's pretty much textbook "I Don't Like It." Carrite (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – This award is covered by all the major news media nationally. (i.e. New York Time, Washington Post, Philadelphia Inquirer, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, San Diego Union, NBA.com, USA TODAY, Chicago Sun-Times and the Los Angeles Times to name a few), as shown by a Google News Search, as provided here . I wouldn’t worry about it snowballing until I got hit with the snowball.  ShoesssS Talk 22:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. No case made by the nominator that the line needs to be drawn here, and the GNG seems to be rather clearly satisfied. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Well written, good structure and notable. Kante4 (talk) 02:19, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Nominator by citing Snowball clause indirectly references WP:IAR. I don't see that Wikipedia editors should take a WP:IAR stand against trivial awards, nor do the sources agree that Big East rookie of the year is trivial.  FYI, here is the San Diego coverage of this year's Big East Rookie of the year, here.  Unscintillating (talk) 07:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I would have initially agreed with the nominator, but proper of the policy would necessitate a keep vote.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Don't see a problem with an article about a notable award. Rlendog (talk) 15:11, 14 March 2011 (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.