Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glynn Geddie


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 02:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Glynn Geddie

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable racing driver. Jonathan McLeod (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Possibly either Jonathan didn't do a WP:BEFORE, or I'm misunderstanding what I'm seeing in my Google search. Surely the following constitutes significant coverage in reliable independent sources?  Press and Journal "Geddie the one to watch at Thruxton", Pit Stop News - "GLYNN GEDDIE STAYS WITH TEAM PARKER RACING FOR 2010", Motors TV - "Glyn Geddie has surprised everyone...".  Also Parr UK, MSport UK, and others. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I "rescued" this from a speedy after the article was created by a user who appeared to be the subject's press agent or some such (and as someone who is much more deletionist than inclusionist, I don't do that sort of thing easily). Regardless of the article's provenance, the subject meets WP:BIO.  Notability is weak, but the coverage and sources are there.  -- Finngall   talk  14:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - My reasoning is that a driver in the Porsche Carrera Cup GB whose racing is limited to this one national series is not really notable, in the same way I would not have thought all the other drivers in the support package would be considered notable. Jonathan McLeod (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That should be "comment", not "delete" - your vote is implicit in the nomination. The only relevant test for notability on Wikipedia is WP:N, "significant coverage in reliable indpendent sources", which has some explanatory guidelines.  Either he has such coverage (and the links above suggest he has) or he doesn't.  If he has the coverage, what events he competes in is really not relevant. - 23:02, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, but is the coverage significant? It's not hard to appear in the press. Both I and my grandmother have been in articles in our local paper, and my dad once appeared on the local TV news (nothing bad!), but I don't think any of us really deserve a page on Wikipedia. Three of the sources given above are just press releases from either Geddies' agent or team, two in minor motorsport news sites and one in Geddie's local paper. The other two are race reports of which one is on a Porsche parts supplier website and the other is on the site of the company which I suspect does the coverage of the series for ITV4, a minor national channel in the UK. I don't think you could argue that the national press is taking notice of Geddie just yet. Note also from WP:N: "routine news coverage such as announcements, sports coverage, and tabloid journalism is not a sufficient basis for a topic to have its own standalone article." 4u1e (talk) 12:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Jonathan is right in that he should not really have an article on Wikipedia. If every racing driver who had an article written about them on the internet had a Wikipedia page about them it would be utter madness. However, it seems the guidelines do not meet this, and so it is a tricky one. - mspete  93  22:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. According to the suggested criteria at WP:ATHLETE it suggests that they should have competed at fully professional level. His current series efforts are all labelled Pro-Am, suggesting quite firmly that it is not a fully professional league. This in motor racing terms quite generous critera measures Geddie as failing athlete notability. --Falcadore (talk) 04:23, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete He's a very junior driver racing in a one-make national series and is in his first season as a professional this year. There doesn't appear to be any notable mention of him in the relevant media. Search didn't throw up any mention of his name on www.autosport.com, for example. Google shows mainly promotional sites, press releases and some race reports. My opinion is that he's one step short of meeting notability - were he to win something at the next level up then I guess he'd be scraping in. Did we ever define notability guidlines for WP:MOTOR? 4u1e (talk) 12:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I think we definitely need to set some sort of minimum requirements in terms of acheivements in certain championships. Last year we had one user create articles for all of the teams and drivers in Euroseries 3000, a series that receives very little coverage. Here, for example, are WikiProject Football's guidlines: -  mspete  93  12:22, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've got a vague recollection that the project may have discussed it once. Worth asking back at the project page. If not, then we probably should create some, although perhaps after this deletion discussion ends. 4u1e (talk) 12:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The main reason I brought this to the attention at WT:MOTOR was to see what people thought about driver notability because I'm worried it'll start getting out of hand if we don't take a stance. This example, though, is clearly a case of someone close to the driver creating an article. - mspete  93  12:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * With no policy guideline at WP:MOTOR, the criteria at WP:ATHLETE can be interpreted quite generously towards motor racing, and by this criteria he fails by any interpretation. --Falcadore (talk) 02:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Created by an account called Spindriftmedia - looking at the driver's website it states "Copyright © 2010 all rights reserved. Spindrift Media". Clearly a single purpose account which is only creating pages on subjects in which the user has a conflict of interest. Readro (talk) 22:14, 17 April 2010 (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.