Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Brent

Jason Brent was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to delete.

One of whole large set of articles on past presidents of the Canadian University Society for Intercollegiate Debate. I'm Canadian and I don't think these people are notable enough to warrant encyclopedia entries, especially not if being president of a university debating society is their most notable achievement. Bearcat 02:36, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * You made this series of links hard to find. I suggest leaving these pages.  If the information is not self-aggrandizing or promotional or incorrect, why not leave it there.  Any Wiki size problems will not be allieviated by removing a page here or there. I am a little naive about these kind of request for deletion issues so feel free to enlighten me. Hu 02:51, 2004 Nov 17 (UTC)


 * How are they hard to find? They're all listed one after another on VfD. As for leaving it there or not, the point of VfD is exactly to discuss that very thing. Bearcat 03:05, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * If being president of the Oxford Union isn't enough to qualify as notable -- which we've already decided -- then certainly being president of CUSID is not. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:07, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)


 * Gosh, the ex-heads of CUSID in the Ontario Liberal Party seem to get much better breaks. Life-is-unfair delete. Samaritan 06:44, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Abstain for now, waiting on further arguments/hopefully consensus on notability of world-ranked university debaters. I suspect Oxford Union presidency precedent isn't promising, but the question is distinct enough. Samaritan 21:29, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. His competitive achievements make him far more notable than just the office of CUSID president. Not all presidents of CUSID are listed with their own entries, only those who were also competitive debaters of international note. Being one of the world's top debaters makes him notable to anyone researching debating and debaters, just like famous athletes.  In addition, while the Oxford Union is certainly a very famous debating society, it is still only a debating society at a single school, whereas CUSID presidents represent an entire country. Fenster 10:12, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete: The argument presented by Fenster has merit, but it argues that those searching for debaters would not find him. To me, this argument serves to justify a large table of "Presidents of the CUSID" that would have name, years, accomplishments, and future activities for its columns.  After all, people searching for this debater by his name will either have gone there from a Canadian debate article's link or because they already know his name.  For me, break out articles should serve to detail a life that has notability along multiple fronts or which has complexity that bears discussion and contextualizing, or where the name will be hit by people in other contexts and a reference will be needed to establish the facts behind the name.  Therefore, I would be happiest with a large table of all presidents, per above, and then redirects at each name.  Geogre 16:09, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable. Being a top North American debater, to me, does not establish notability. I'm probably a top North American something, but I don't think I should be here either. Lord Bob 18:41, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Just because you don't recognize international competitive debate as being a notable activity doesn't mean that others don't. Living in North America, I don't feel that soccer or chess are particularly significant 'sports', but that doesn't mean that we should delete all achievements in those fields from Wikipedia. --Fenster 04:37, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * There you go. 'Just because you don't recognize international competitive debate as being a notable activity'. I am not in a position to vote with somebody else's opinion, only with my own. Lord Bob 06:55, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * The point is that this isn't a discussion over the significance of debating, it's a discussion over the significance of the debater. I'm not challenging your right to vote your opinion, I'm challenging the logic underlying your vote. --Fenster 09:35, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I understand that, but the problem is that, in my opinion, a debater who did little else of note is not encyclopaedia-worthy. Unlike professional athletes, debaters are not paid millions of dollars and regularly shown in prime time on major television networks to do their thing. I am sure that Jason Brent isn't often accosted on the streets with, "Wow, you're Jason Brent the debater!" They also do not make a great contribution to society or do anything notable, like scientists and the like. I'm sure he's a very good debater, I just don't think Wikipedia is the place for him. Now, if he set some sort of record in the world championships by getting a perfect score for the first time or something, I'd have voted to keep. Lord Bob 19:51, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * It's hard to justify listing the person who came in second place at the championships when the first place winner doesn't have an entry. AndyL 02:47, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Gamaliel 03:36, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete all in this sequence. I don't think presidents of student groups are intrinsically notable, and despite there being some meagre attempts at saying these people arn't nonnotable, none of them have convinced me. Sorry. --Improv 18:12, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Please re-read the arguments in favor. They're not notable for being president of a student group, they're notable for being among the world's best at a competitive activity. They should be included just as major amateur athletes are. See Stephen Pitel for a look at how these articles might be expanded. --Fenster 02:52, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable debater. DCEdwards1966 04:32, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notable within his sphere, but the sphere itself is hardly notable (debating is, but Canadian collegiate debate in particular is a stretch).  -- WOT 17:02, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * He was 2nd at the WORLD debating championship. -- Fenster 19:39, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Debaters are notable. Academic Challenger 00:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Doesn't seem notable. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:00, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: wrong side of the line. Seems appropriate to mention his name in a list of past winners in World Universities Debating Championship and whatever else he was a finalist in. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:56, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * My last word on this: when Andy on The Apprentice has his achievement of being a "nationally-ranked high school debater" stand as his famous accomplishment, surely being the national college champion, or top 10 in the world at the university level, is worth some notability. Someone asked for an example of a fan site to show that non-participants are interested in varsity debating -- here is a rather elaborate one: . -- Fenster 07:40, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.