Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Alexander (defensive tackle)


 * 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. Shimeru (talk) 06:49, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Charles Alexander (defensive tackle)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Undrafted free agent, did not sign with a team (failed physical with the Eagles).  Eagles   24/7  (C)  19:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  — Eagles   24/7   (C)  19:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.  — Eagles   24/7   (C)  19:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:ATH and WP:GNG.-- Giants 27  ( Contribs  |  WP:CFL ) 19:22, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I stand by my choice to !vote delete due to the fact all of the coverage while independent is local coverage and is thus to be expected for every college athlete.-- Giants 27  ( Contribs  |  WP:CFL ) 21:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, the coverage Alexander received is in no way comparable to what is to be "expected for every college athlete." I regularly review AfDs for college football players.  When they fall below the notability threshold, I don't vote to keep.  The typical college football players do not have feature stories written about them.  The typical college football player will draw, at most, passing references in game coverage articles.  Alexander, on the other hand, has been the subject of numerous articles focusing on him as the principal subject of the article.  The coverage received by Alexander is more than sufficient to show general notability. Cbl62 (talk) 21:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, the media coverage of Alexander is not limited to a local newspaper. There are articles about him from The Sporting News, the Associated Press, the Orlando Sentinel, and the major daily newspapers in both New Orleans (The Times-Picayune) and Baton Rouge (The Advocate). Cbl62 (talk) 22:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * While there are numerous feature stories, like I said all of them are local coverage (LSU's media and the New Jersey ones for him failing the physical with the Eagles). All college athletes are expected to receive headline stories on every single thing they do no matter how important it is. Just because he was a starter and apparently a good college player and received local coverage it doesn't mean IMO that he's notable.(This last bit is added on after an edit conflict) While true the majority of it is local (the Baton Rouge paper, is local while it may be major it still covers LSU fully like the San Francisco Chronicle with Stanford) and thus IMO don't count towards notability. The 4 or so national sources include 1 game wrapup, 2 stories on him receiving a 6th year (which is unusual) and 1 game preview. -- Giants 27  ( Contribs  |  WP:CFL ) 23:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply. The fact that there are "numerous feature stories" about him in respected media outlets like The Sporting News, the Associated Press, and the daily papers in both New Orleans and Baton Rouge ought to be enough to establish notability. There is simply nothing in the notability standards to suggest that articles in daily newspapers from major cities like New Orleans and Baton Rouge should not count in assessing notability.  I understand your point of view, but I believe it reflects (not just by you) a bias against college football players.  If a local politician, professor, or businessman had 20 feature articles about him, I don't think anyone would be challenging his notability. There should be, and is, no higher threshold of notability for an athlete than for any other person. Cbl62 (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. A clear failure of WP:ATH.--Mkativerata (talk) 20:13, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Abraham Lincoln doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE, should we delete him? Umbralcorax (talk) 23:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Abraham Lincoln is not an athlete. And I tend to weigh guidelines (the GNG says that significant coverage only presumes notability - that presumption can be rebutted, in my view, by failing more specific guidelines like WP:ATH) as being considerably stronger than essays with two contributors. But that is my view and you are entitled to disagree. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Taken to its extreme, your argument that WP:ATH trumps WP:GNG would mean that a college football player who never plays in the pro leagues could never qualify. I know from reviewing your past comments (which I respect) on other AfDs that you do not take the argument to such an extreme.  Query though, how many feature stories would be enough, in your opinion, for a college player to be notable?  And would you require the same number of feature stories for a politician, businessman, or academic? Cbl62 (talk) 23:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a difficult question and the position can't be taken to its extreme. There clearly need to be exceptions. This case may very well be an exception: I'm not wedded to my delete position (and consensus is clearly not going to be to delete). Here, the featured content is quite local (eg the 2009 Times-Picayune article) and the non-local content (such as the AP article) is quite brief and uninformative. It is my view that if we apply WP:GNG too strictly (either way) for athletes, we may as well not have WP:ATH at all. Likewise, applying WP:ATH without any regard to WP:GNG means we would have deleted LeBron James. So I think it should be a balancing exercise between WP:GNG and WP:ATH - both after all only create presumptions of notability. Neither should override the other. I think this guy's coverage in news sources is outweight by the fact that he's never come remotely close to playing football on a professional level. But very much an on-balance judgement. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:57, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I agree that all factors need to be balanced and not taken to extremes.  A couple of specific points, though.  (1) On the issue of discounting local coverage, I can sympathize with the point more when the only source is to a single small-town article or two.  But I would strongly oppose any notion that we should disregard stories from major metropolitan daily newspapers (like New Orleans' The Times-Picayune).  (2) There remains, in my experience, a disconnect in that many seem to apply a higher threshold to notability for athletes than others.  If 20 feature stories is enough for the business exec, city council member, or researcher, there ought not be a different threshold for an athlete.  To impose a different threshold would be imposing one's own personal viewpoint that athletics is a less worthy endeavor than others.  Cbl62 (talk) 00:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I agree with that. I apply the same considerations to local politicians: that unexceptional local coverage tends to be insufficient to surmount failing WP:POLITICIAN. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. Alexander was a starter for LSU Tigers during the 2007 national championship year and in the two following years.  The article when it was proposed for AfD was a weak stub, buy I have now put a lot of effort into improving/rescuing it.  I would ask the "delete" voters above to take another look.  Remember WP:ATH is an inclusionary standard, not an exclusionary one.  A college football player meets general notability standard if he has been the subject of non-trivial coverage in the mainstream media.  Alexander has been the subject of numerous articles focusing on him (i.e., not passing references in game coverage) in the mainstream article.  I am working to integrate a number of those stories into the article.  Cbl62 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep- Numerous independent sources render WP:ATHLETE meaningless in this case. The GNG is met and then some. Umbralcorax (talk) 23:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:Athlete--Yankees10 01:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep More than meets general notability guideline with a wide array of reliable sources and notability. I've never bought the argument that a player has to play football "in the NFL" before they are considered notable--especially since college football experienced over 50 years of active play before the NFL even came in to existence.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:35, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep an article with this sourcing clearly meets the WP:GNG. Any discussion of WP:ATHLETE is irrelevant. matt91486 (talk) 00:29, 6 May 2010 (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.