Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darrell Scott (American football)


 * 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The result was   WITHDRAWN - Nominator endorses early closure. Zim Zala Bim talk  04:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Darrell Scott (American football)
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia has come to an understanding of what constitute notable athletes. These guidelines have been discussed and debated extensively and used repeatedly as the foundation for AFD discussions conerning non-notable athletes. Per WP:ATHLETE athletes generally have to fit one of the following two categories to warrant their own article:
 * People who have competed at the fully professional level of a sport, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis.[9]
 * People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships.

This means that eventhough an athlete may receive coverage in their local paper or play at a collegiate level, where they receive coverage for their involvement in a team, they are generally not notable until they play at the highest level. There are several HS and College players who have existing articles.

This is a non-notable college football player who hasn't done anything. He is no more notable than your local newsreporter or councilwoman. Just because there are some articles, doesn't make the player notable. --- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 07:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC) As there appears to be a debate at wp:athlete, I notified them of this ongoing afd
 * Delete. Per nom. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  08:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Do you consider the New York Times your average local newspaper? ––bender235 (talk) 11:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Regardless of WP:ATHLETE, how can you deny that the 12 sources in the article are more than enough to meet WP:N? Oren0 (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. (Balloonman has nominated several college football players for deletion with the same rationale, so I will post my same rationale to all of his AfDs.) WP:ATHLETE is considered to be an additional criterion to notability, as indicated here: (Should a person fail to meet these additional criteria, they may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability.) Whether this player may or may not meet WP:ATHLETE should not be the question. The basic criteria, as outlined by WP:BIO, is that these players must be the subject of published[3] secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent,[4] and independent of the subject.[5]. It also says that if the depth of the coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability. Take a look at the sources referenced by the article - do they not meet these requirements? I think they do. BlueAg09 (Talk) 11:27, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources check out, passes WP:N §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  11:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:ATHLETE is an exception to general WP:N requirements, not a replacement of them. There may well be professional athletes that would not meet general notability requirements, see Keith Cash and Kerry Cash but they get in despite no references or reliable sources other than them having played in the NFL.  Conversely, there are athletes who do not meet WP:ATHLETE but do get in under general notability standards.  See Brian Orakpo and Colt McCoy as examples of athletes who have not played at the professional level but have garnered enough notability at the college level to be included.  Scott seems to be one of those who has reached general notability standards even in high school.  Sergio Kindle is such a player.  Sometimes these players don't make it to the pros, see Robert Strait sometimes they do, see Adrian L. Peterson.-- 2008 Olym pian chit chat 12:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Meets general notability guidelines, which generally take precedence over specific conditions listed under WP:ATHLETE (which are meant to help establish notability if the general conditions aren't met). -- Zim Zala Bim talk  17:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:N, which is merely supplimented by WP:ATHLETE. &mdash; neuro(talk) 20:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:N trumps WP:ATHLETE. I expect every competent administrator to know this. SashaNein (talk) 19:29, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Super Keep One policy: WP:ATHLETE.--  Iamawesome  800  23:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Passes WP:ATHLETE: plays at the highest amateur level for his sport - Division I American college football.  Grsz  11  03:54, 16 December 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.