Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eduardo Paulino


 * 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 Delete. InShaneee (talk) 12:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Eduardo Paulino

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable minor league baseball player. Page created by his representatives or management company, a definite conflict of interest. Can't find significant sources online... He has recently been playing in the Mexican Leagues but it remains unclear if those satisfy the requirements of baseball notability. Spanneraol (talk) 02:11, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Spanneraol (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 02:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 02:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. There's nothing "unclear" about whether or not the Mexican League counts. It does. It's the top-level league in Mexico, and it was explicitly recognized as a league that counted during the writing of the guideline. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 14:48, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails notability guidlines. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete article of a player of dubious quality created by an SPA and commercial spammer  Ohconfucius  ping / poke 04:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Mexican League isn't fully professional. Secret account 01:52, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * What makes you say that? -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 22:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable minor league baseball player.  Not entitled to presumption of notability per WP:NBASEBALL because subject never played in a regular season Major League Baseball game.  Fails to satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG with substantial coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you actually read WP:BASE/N? Specifically, section 2? The Mexican League is the top-level league in Mexico. Participation in MLB isn't necessary, since this is an encyclopedia for the entire world, not just the USA. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 22:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you, and I quote it often, but I don't subscribe to your very liberal interpretation. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 23:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not a "liberal interpretation". It's what the guideline says. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 19:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've already reviewed the WP:NBASEBALL talk page archives. There has never been a consensus that the Mexican league players should be entitled to a presumption of notability per WP:NBASEBALL, as stated by the nominator.  You, among several others, have argued for such inclusion, but there has never been an express consensus to do so.  Until there is, Mexican league players must satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG for inclusion.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Where would be the sense in writing a notability guideline that covers all major non-US leagues except the second-largest and most successful (behind only NPB)? Stop and think for a second... -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:BASE/N as above. PianoDan (talk) 13:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete I suggest Hit bull, win steak read WP:BASE/N #6, which clearly provides a basis for establishing notability of minor league players. I don't see any evidence where he would meet WP:GNG either. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That would be a great argument if teams in the LMB were affiliated with MLB clubs - but they aren't. In fact, LMB teams are autonomous, and they have their own minor league affiliates. That's the whole reason for the "top-level national league" language in the guideline - to separate players in the LMB (who are covered by the guideline) from players in the Liga Norte de Mexico, Liga de Béisbol del Noroeste de México, and Mexican Academy League (who are not). -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:37, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but if you read the article Mexican League it clearly states it is part of Minor League Baseball. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it wasn't "part of minor league baseball". I said that it wasn't affiliated - which it isn't. All minor league clubs EXCEPT those in the Mexican League (and their minor leagues) are affiliated with individual MLB teams, and those MLB parent clubs determine the hiring and firing of field staff, the acquisition or discharge of players, the distribution of playing time, etc. for all of their affiliates. Mexican League clubs are not affiliated with MLB clubs, so they do all of those things themselves. They operate completely independently and in parallel to the rest of organized baseball. If MLB teams want to acquire players from a Mexican League club, they have to arrange that with the club on a case-by-case basis, and the Mexican League club isn't required to go along with the deal if they don't think that it is to their advantage. Their connection to the entire rest of "minor league baseball" is nominal at best, and is a legacy of the specific language of the player transfer agreement worked out between the Mexican League and MLB in the 1950s. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 19:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Again, the sourced article Mexican League states that the said league is part of MiLB. You have provided no reliable, verifiable sources that back up your statements. The article does to support mine. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:04, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Again, I never said that the Mexican League wasn't part of organized baseball. I said that its connection to organized baseball is essentially nominal and its position within organized baseball is substantially different from that of every other league, due to the fact that its clubs are autonomous rather than affiliated with major league teams, and the fact that it is the top-level league in its country while the other leagues in organized baseball are not. The second sentence in the Mexican League article to which you linked says, and I quote, "Unlike the other two Triple-A circuits, the International League and the Pacific Coast League, Mexican League teams are not affiliated with Major League teams." Did you actually read the article to which you were linking? This is easily confirmed externally as well - see, for example, this FAQ on the official site of Minor League Baseball, which says, "though the Mexican League is part of Minor League Baseball and the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues, its teams and players are not directly affiliated with Major League organizations". If you would like a good summary of the history of the Mexican League and its affiliation with MLB, and the reason that things developed in the way in which they did, The Rise of the Latin American Baseball Leagues, 1947-1961: Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Puerto Rico, and Venezuela by Lou Hernández (McFarland, 2011, ISBN 0786463848) has a reasonably clear and thorough summary of Anuar Canavati's negotiations with MLB at the beginning of their relationship. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 17:10, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That still doesn't solve the WP:GNG problem. There are any sources on him. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Though I disagree with the rule, the Mexican League technically is the top level of baseball in Mexico, and per WP:BASE/N: "Baseball figures are presumed notable if they...Have appeared in at least one game in...any other top-level national league." I personally think the rule should be changed for the LMB, since MLB recognizes it as a minor league, but as the rule stands, he's notable. Alex (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I Think the difference is in the interpretation of what constitutes "top level". Spanneraol (talk) 03:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If the Mexican League is not the top level of professional baseball within Mexico, then what is? -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 17:12, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Criteria #2 of WP:NBASEBALL states: "Have appeared in at least one game in any one of the following active major leagues: Major League Baseball, Nippon Professional Baseball, Korea Baseball Organization, Chinese Professional Baseball League or any other top-level national league." First of all, the Mexican league is not a "major league."  Second, the Mexican league may be the highest level of baseball in Mexico, but it is not a "top-level" league comparable to the examples provided: "Major League Baseball, Nippon Professional Baseball, Korea Baseball Organization, [or] Chinese Professional Baseball League."  We have now reached the point where several editors are advocating that players who have played one game in the Italian baseball league should be presumed notable.  Hey, why not the Turkish league?  Or the German league?  The Venezuelan winter league?  There is no consensus to extend the presumption to these other national leagues, and anyone who has read the WP:NSPORTS talk page archives knows that.  It was specifically discussed, and no consensus was reached.  In short, these leagues are not at the "top level" of the sport and the amount of of in-depth coverage of their players does not justify a presumption that most of them would pass a WP:GNG analysis.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * You are confusing Major Leagues (with a capital "M") with "major leagues" (in the sense that of all the leagues, these are the primary and notable ones). Furthermore, the level of competition in the Mexican League is much, much higher than in the Chinese Professional Baseball League (i.e. the national baseball league of Taiwan) - there is no rational standard which would exclude the former and include the latter. As far as league quality is concerned, the Mexican League is at worst the fourth-strongest national league in the entire world, behind only MLB, NPB (i.e. Japan) and Serie Nacional (i.e. Cuba). I'm not sure what you are intending to prove by your hypothetical cases. Turkey, for example, does not have a national professional league at all, and it seems pointless to speculate about how one would be treated were it to come into existence... -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * HBWS, you can argue this until you are blue in the face, but the "legislative history" of WP:NBASEBALL does not support the inclusion of the Mexican league. You personally argued this point in WP:NBASEBALL talk page discussions and no consensus was reached in favor of your position.  I suggest that you re-read your own comments and those in opposition to yours in the talk page archives.  As for me, I see no reason to repeat myself.  The position of the opposed !votes in this AfD are perfectly clear; they just disagree with your position.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your contention that no consensus was reached in those discussions, and a consensus that recognized inherent notability for the CPBL but rejected it for the Mexican League would be totally laughable and functionally unworkable. Seriously, try to come up with a rationale behind that position that would make any sense at all. I dare you. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 21:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sigh, the league level of play decreased so much recently that it doesn't technically meet our guidelines anymore. Mexican League is a very tricky subject. Those who played in the 1940s and 1950s should be included, as it was fully professional and in the same level as the old Cuban League which is listed under our notability guidelines if the player passes WP:GNG as well and not some one gamer whose only source is a boxscore. The discussion whether to include current Mexican League players, or just from the glory era belongs in notability guideline talk page and not here. Secret account 04:32, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 02:43, 16 January 2013 (UTC)




 * I have removed the last "relisted debate" notice as inappropriate and unnecessary. There is a clear 7–2 consensus to delete this article, and no new comments have been added since January 11, 2013 (twelve days).  I questioned the previous relisting on January 16, but gave MBisanz's explanation the benefit of the doubt.  Based on the clear existing consensus and the failure of anyone to comment for the last 12 days, it is clear that further extensions of this discussion are not appropriate and not necessary.  I also question whether relistings of AfD discussion by non-administrators under circumstances such as these is appropriate generally.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 10:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * REQUEST IMMEDIATE CLOSE by any uninvolved administrator per my comment immediately above. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 10:51, 23 January 2013 (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.