Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Jordan


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Jeffrey Jordan

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:ATHLETE. Never played professionally. Notability is not inherited. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 20:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - he is competing at the highest level of amatuer basketball in the United States. --Dincher (talk) 20:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Although being the son of Michael Jordan might make Jeffrey Jordan more noticed than his fellow Illini players by the national press, and perhaps qualify him under WP:ROYALTY (that's a joke, crown-sniffers), playing for an NCAA Division I team in any sport is not inherently notable. WP:ATHLETE was changed in order to close out the argument that "the highest amateur level of a sport" means that all college athletes are entitled to their own articles.  Otherwise, we'd have tons of articles about all the players on a particular team (in this case, its Illinois, but I would say the same about Kentucky and North Carolina as well).  The phrase "usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships" was added to close whatever loophole might be inferred.  In this case, there's an article called 2009-10 Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball team where all of the player bio stuff can be put, and mention can be made in Michael Jordan as well.  I think that the press is more likely to let Jeffrey make his own accomplishments, without constantly reminding everyone who his father is, and I think a merger is preferable to an article.  Mandsford (talk) 21:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Amatuer basketball not longer participate in the Olympics or World Championships. Those events are now for pros. Dincher (talk) 22:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect - He does not even play collegiate basketball anymore. His article had potential when he was still playing and receiving media coverage, now the article cannot really grow. It would be best to merge it into Michael Jordan Legacy section. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  22:50, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: If he makes a comeback and continues to compete then there is much room for expansion. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  17:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete He is not a notable college student. There are many college offspring of notable people.  As a college basketball player, he was of sufficient notability not to delete his page.  Unless he is going to play in college with the possibility of professional play, he does not pass WP:N.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Waivering If he comesback, I vote keep.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:57, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the proper thing to do is keep the page and if he is not on the roster next month renominate this page for deletion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, or create a Family of Michael Jordan article and merge this there. Jeff Jordan was the primary subject of dozens of newspaper articles, beginning when he was in high school, so there's no shortage of information available. I'm well aware of WP:NOTINHERITED, but when we're talking about a clearly important figure like Michael Jordan, I think it's fine to provide some information on his close relatives, as long as such information is available. People are interested in this stuff; this article got 18429 hits last month alone. Zagalejo^^^ 02:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Jordan played for a major program and has been extensively covered by third party media. -Drdisque (talk) 20:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Jordan is talking to coaches about coming back to basketball. ESPN external link. Paradox  society  (review) 16:44, 9 October 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.