Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garrett Wittels


 * 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 speedy keep per WP:SK. Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding delete votes. (non-admin closure) • Gene93k (talk) 23:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Garrett Wittels

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Semi-notable former minor league baseball player, though I'm not convinced he's notable enough for an article. 1. He never reached the major leagues, so he fails WP:BASE/N. 2. His professional career lasted two seasons, so it in itself was not notable. 3. Many of the links on his article point to WP:ONEEVENT (a dropped rape charge). 4. I'm not convinced his long hitting streak makes him notable, because it occurred at a low level (college) and was not record breaking. Alex (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * NOMINATION WITHDRAWN Let's clear out this list a little bit. Alex (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Alex (talk) 20:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Alex (talk) 20:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Alex (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets GNG. As the title of the full-length ESPN article on him makes clear, "Where have you gone, Garrett Wittels?; The shortstop's epic hitting streak once thrilled MLB, until his epic fall", he received substantial coverage for two notable ("epic", in the words of ESPN) events. Not one. BLP1E only applies where the person's coverage is solely as to "a single event". You don't apply it to each event in their life, seriatum. He didn't, as implied -- though the nom doesn't indicate that his examination went beyond those refs already in the article, just receive coverage for the rape charge, but also for his hitting streak.  Epeefleche (talk) 01:40, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 01:47, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep His streak, even though not record breaking, was well covered by various media outlets, , , and .  Note that none of these articles mention the charge so I dont think WP:ONEEVENT applies.  While I think this shows, along with the above, that GNG is met one could also reasonably argue that by being a member of the 2010 College Baseball All-America Team he meets WP:NCOLLATH since being on the All-American team is listed on Template:College Football Awards.RonSigPi (talk) 03:56, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article has major BLP issues and definitely needs to be fixed in that regard, but his notability's not close to being in question. His minor league career isn't notable, but his college career is. Wizardman  15:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comments. Nom seems not to understand that if a baseball player meets GNG by receiving substantial coverage in independent RSs, as is the case here, it is irrelevant whether any of the individual's accomplishments meet WP:BASE/N. This was explained to nom recently at his nomination here, but he appears not to have taken on the guideline language he was referred to at that AfD.


 * Further, it is unclear whether nom engages in the requisite wp:before search--given his focus above on refs in the article itself, rather than refs that he would see if he conducted that requisite search. Epeefleche (talk) 23:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep plainly notable. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 06:06, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * NOMINATION WITHDRAWN Let's clear out this list a little bit. Alex (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2014 (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.