Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ellis Lankster


 * 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 (default keep).  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Ellis Lankster

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

Non-notable. The creator of this page has a history of creating articles for every WVU athlete. While some are worthy of Wikipedia entries, this one is not. This is a cornerback/special teams guy who is not a star on a team that is not high-profile. Not notable, as evidenced by its orphan article status; we cannot keep articles on every college athlete as they are not all notable. Timneu22 (talk) 12:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - He's not an underclassman and he has established himself as a solid defensive back in addition to special teams. 2nd team Big East.  I added a couples articles I quickly found through Google.  Though not the most well known College Football player around, I believe he meets notability. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 16:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. If we list every player who was first- or second- team something, WP will get out of hand quickly. There are lots of athletes who fall into this category. Timneu22 (talk) 16:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: I agree with your basic point, though it is the third-party coverage  that convinced me that this one should stay.  Also you may consider editing/updating the "underclassman special teams" guy in your initial nomination .  --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 16:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete He fails WP:ATHLETE as the NCAA isn't a professional league, and he hasn't played in the Olympics or anything of that caliber. However, there still is the general notability criteria, and according to the sources I found, they do mention him, but not in the significant coverage field that would make him pass WP:N. Tavix (talk) 22:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the WP:ATHLETE tip. There are a number of articles I nominated for deletion today; they all fail the WP:ATHLETE notability argument, but I was not aware of it. Timneu22 (talk) 23:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment- Timneu22, you probably want to view this Discussion. Not that I'm saying it directly relates to this afd, or that it should be discussed any further here. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 23:11, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a red link. :( Timneu22 (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: It was indeed red - for the one minute after I posted it. Literally (look at the times of our comments) --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:25, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Seems to have a good amount of coverage; this is the most on-topic article some quick searching turns up that's exclusively about him. Not sure the professional/amateur distinction makes much sense in this case; in the U.S., NCAA football is considerably more notable (in the sense of actually being noted) than many professional sports leagues are. --Delirium (talk) 21:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I cannot find anything that this athlete has done that is notable. Second-team All-Big East is his biggest recognition; it is hardly notable. Timneu22 (talk) 22:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete... for now. At present, the only indication of his meeting WP:ATHLETE is the brief USA Today article, but he has not done enough to clear the notability bar (participation in the Senior Bowl would not make him clear the notability bar, but winning an NCAA award or making the roster of an NFL team would). It should also be noted that WVU coverage by West Virginia-based newspapers (with the possible exception of The Herald-Dispatch of Huntington) is not as "independent" as, say that by newspapers in another state. WVU connections run deep and wide in the Mountaineer State. B.Wind (talk) 03:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I know about wp:crystal ball, but just by going by the basics (Senior Bowl participation, 2nd team Big East), this guy has a pretty decent shot of making a NFL Team next Fall. So we can delete this article that it's in pretty good shape, and then if he makes the team someone will create a stub and it'll sit there.  Or, we could wait.  If he doesn't make a NFL team then certainly it should be deleted.  Not that I'm saying there's anything particularly wrong with deleting it now (if it's determined he doesn't meet notability), but just something to consider. By the way I had nothing to do with the creation of this article and am not a WVU fan. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 12:46, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for now, seems to fail WP:ATHLETE/WP:BIO in general. Stifle (talk) 14:50, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep--WP:crystal, individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Evidence for meeting this criteria: "Senior Bowl President and CEO Steve Hale: “It’s great to see local players go off to major colleges and have outstanding careers and establish themselves as solid NFL prospects...We believe Ellis is one of the better cover and kick return prospects in this year’s draft.” 1Lankster's ratings by the NFL Draft Scout: 18 out of 228 CB's and 149 out of 2608. 2. No need to delete, the subject notability is growing, There is no deadline--Jmundo (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2009 (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.