Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big James Henderson


 * 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. Big James may not be notable, but he's got a theology degree and can bench press four published, publicly funded particle physics theorists.'''. Gwen Gale (talk) 06:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Big James Henderson

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails to meet criteria outlined in WP:BIO. No independent, reliable sources attesting his notability. Google search on the subject returns 18 hits, mostly message boards and self published webpages.  Quar te t  13:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. My GoogleNews, GoogleBooks, and GoogleSearch was more successful. Double Blue  (Talk) 13:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. Few verifiable sources (if any) to establish notability (or any of the info in the article as it stands now). Also possible WP:COI with main article contributor.--Komrade Kiev (talk) 14:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.   --  Double Blue  (Talk) 13:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. A (former?) world record holder in a well-known discipline, and as DoubleBlue suggests there seem to be a good number of reliable sources that support that. Certainly seems notable and verifiable to me. ~ mazca talk 15:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. It may be verifiable that Henderson was the first man to bench press 700 lbs., however nearly all of the article as it stands now is original research (see section entitled "Controversial lift" as an example). A look through the links provided above as evidence that the article should be kept reveals very few sources that can truely be considered reliable by Wikipedia standards to verify any of the information that is listed other than the claim of first to press 700 lbs. WP:BIO states that "Competitors and coaches who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them)" are notable - however based on the sources I've seen so far Henderson does not meet this criteria. If one were to remove information from the article as it stands based on WP:BLP it would be a stub. --Yankees76 (talk) 16:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, mainly per the high number of g-news hits, but also the world record. It's true that this article has an OR problem, but that's not grounds for deletion- just remove what's not cited. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 23:09, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, basically what I was thinking. Parts of the current article are pretty awful but it's clear enough to me that the subject's notable, so it's more a case of cleanup than deletion. ~ mazca talk 12:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * keep Even a single world benchpress title would confer notability. He won the world title 5 years in a row. AfD hero (talk) 08:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Needs to be cleaned up, but seems notable enough. Dayewalker (talk) 08:18, 27 May 2008 (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.