Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Denson


 * 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. Wizardman 15:57, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

David Denson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

While the subject has been the object of the routine coverage one would expect of a promising High School and college baseball prospect, as well as what would be expected of any minor league player, we don't post articles on baseball players who have not played in the major leagues. And the coverage that is cited could easily be claimed for any number of other minor league players. The only real claim to notability is the player's decision to announce his sexual orientation. Subject fails WP:NBASE and WP:BLP1E. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passed WP:GNG, with significant coverage in multiple, independent sources. This supersedes an SNG. As WP:NSPORTS itself says: "Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted". Might not be the most talented baseball player at this time, but meets WP:WHYN in that a neutral, whole article can be written, and it's already beyond a WP:PERMASTUB.  WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST is not generally a reason to delete. The article currently only has three sentences on his sexuality, so BLP1E is not an issue. For those still in doubt, his being the first publicly gay baseball player is likely to get (at worst) some continued coverage.  At worst, this is a wait and see.—Bagumba (talk) 05:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. —Bagumba (talk) 05:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. —Bagumba (talk) 05:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Routine coverage isn't notable for bios. If he is the first MLB player to come out as gay he might meet WP:ANYBIO criteria 2. At this point it is too soon to tell WP:TOOSOON. The possibility of notability is not notability.--Savonneux (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This coverage is "routine"? Did you read any of it? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sports reporters covering sports is like entertainment press covering actors. Also WP:AGF--Savonneux (talk) 00:27, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Much like WP:ITSLOCAL, coverage is coverage, despite its perceived scope. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:31, 20 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge to Milwaukee Brewers minor league players. Agree that its too soon for a stand alone bio, but he is suitable for the minor league list article. Spanneraol (talk) 12:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Enough coverage to pass WP:N, which trumps WP:NBASE. While his sexual orientation may be considered BLP1E, he also has coverage for being a decent prospect that precedes his coming out, such as a the Woods article, which is more than routine.  If not kept, then certainly merge per Spanneraol is more appropriate than delete. Rlendog (talk) 15:42, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge to Milwaukee Brewers minor league players. Right now, his fame is based on what one might consider WP:ONEEVENT. Alex (talk) 15:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You create Kyle Hunter (baseball) and Phil McCormick with pretty much zero coverage, and you don't think this guy is notable? Amazing--Yankees10 17:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment As the nom I am comfortable with a merge as suggested above. It seems like a reasonable course of action conceding that he has garnered some attention and there is a suitable target article. I remain convinced though, that excepting the attention over his personal life, the rest looks purely routine and does not rise to the level justifying an exception to NBASE. -16:07, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep With help of, I think we've provided sufficient sources for this to remain a stand-alone page without the need for a merge. Closing admin should take note of the sourcing that exists from before his publicly coming out, which goes along with the significantly in depth coverage of him upon his coming out. It's not the "coming out" that gets the article, that would be BLP1E. No, this is a biography about a notable person who came out. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:11, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Also to respond to 's mention in his initial rationale that "we don't post articles on baseball players who have not played in the major leagues", we have many articles written for people who have yet to make their major league debuts. Many will, others won't. Lots of them are already retired. See Category:Minor league baseball players. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment On the surface, WP:BLP1E might sound applicable, but lets run through the actual conditions in the policy: Red x.svg 1) If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. The bulk of this article is not about his coming out. Red x.svg 2) If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. He's a pro athlete that was already in the public eye, not your average Joe Citizen where privacy is a bigger concern. Red x.svg 3) If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. Individual's role is clear and well documented.—Bagumba (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Some might think WP:ONEEVENT is applicable, but that is only relevant if there are overlapping articles on an event and involved individuals. In this case, there is no duplication; this is the only article, and his coming out is a small portion of it. In the worst case, if one still argues that he is just famous for the one event, it doesn't say the article can't exist: "a person famous for only one event may be more widely known than the event itself, for example, the Tank Man. In such cases, the article about the event may be most appropriately named for the person involved." —Bagumba (talk) 16:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of coverage.--Yankees10 17:16, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Article is significant enough. Boaxy (talk) 07:48, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I think there are enough sources here. First gay baseball player is significant. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 13:42, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Other first professional gay baseball players:
 * Sean Conroy via Sports Illustrated another Minor League player who has come out aroud the same time as this guy
 * Glenn Burke in 1982 who I might add actually played in the major league.--Savonneux (talk) 02:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Nobody created Sean Conroy because he doesn't meet WP:GNG. Burke came out after he retired, whereas Denson came out while he's active. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:30, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Conroy is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, the preeminent baseball league in the world. Burke's sexuality was never made public while he was playing. Here's an article from grantland.com that might convince some as to why an athlete coming out still remains a big deal.—Bagumba (talk) 02:37, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Doesn't meet WP:GNG? He got a wire story. Apparently that's enough here.--Savonneux (talk) 06:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:BIO as several have pointed out already. See also some sources not cited in the article from the last few days: CNN, Sports Illustrated, Slate, Daily Beast, Peru.com, USA Today in broader context, RDS.ca, Jetzt.de, Independent Record follow up... and 114,000 results in a Google News search for '"david denson" baseball'. A first of this kind, which is now part of LGBT and MLB history, is the kind of story that receives coverage over time. His coming out is a single event (not that BLP1E would apply, as there's plenty of baseball coverage, too), but being the first openly gay MLB-affiliated player is ongoing. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 13:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - in agreement with discussions to keep. Gmcbjames (talk) 22:18, 20 August 2015 (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.