Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Mahon


 * 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 redirect to Jim Mahon Memorial Trophy. Content remains in the history to be merged. No prejudice against recreating this article as an article IF the "multiple books" claimed to be written about him (or other equally strong sources) ever surface. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:46, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Jim Mahon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Junior hockey player does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NHOCKEY. History should be deleted and redirected to Jim Mahon Memorial Trophy since there's a trophy. Flibirigit (talk) 21:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 02:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 02:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Baby miss  fortune 02:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete fails the notability guidelines for hockey players.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Multiple books have been written about him, the Petes routinely commemorate his legacy. It is a bit weak, but I think there is enough for GNG, particularly "Called Home" and he is mentioned in many other books as being inspirational for young players.  Dying in 1971 makes it unlikely to find a lot of online hits.18abruce (talk) 14:26, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * What are the multiple books? Please check the references. There's only one book written by the guy's friend? Flibirigit (talk) 07:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep The multiple feature articles 40+ years later make me lean keep regarding GNG. We have multiple sources with the articles, but the minimum required and the local nature of the coverage raises some WP:ROUTINE concerns.  I am not familiar with how the book being cited was published.  If its self-published, then I don't think we can count it as independent (e.g., its in the same category as a blog with no editorial review), so I am not considering the book towards meeting GNG.  If someone can explain that it holds up to review for the GNG requirements, then I would go from weak keep to keep. RonSigPi (talk) 21:33, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep for similar reasons to RonSigPi, but also because the fact that the OHL named an award after him indicates that he must have received some attention at the time which may be difficult to find online. If not kept my 2nd choice would certainly not be to delete but rather redirect to the trophy; not seeing any need to delete the history in that case especially since it may be useful if further sources are found in the future. Rlendog (talk) 02:19, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The league did not name a trophy after the player. His team named the trophy and donated the trophy in his memory. Flibirigit (talk) 07:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Regardless of who named what after whom, a very well covered and notable league has a major trophy named after this player. Even under the facts you give, the league accepted the trophy and started awarding it.  That is a relevant fact. RonSigPi (talk) 16:38, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * As may be, but notability more being inherited, of course that doesn't mean in of itself that the player himself is notable.   Ravenswing   23:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * From the first non-example paragraph from what you cited at WP:NOTINHERITED "Inherent notability is the idea that something qualifies for an article merely because it exists, even if zero independent reliable sources have ever taken notice of the subject." That is not the case here.  There are sources with this case.  I think this also may be a case of considering WP:RAP and Letter and spirit of the law.  Awarding the Stanley Cup is relevant to if Lord Stanley of Preston merits an article, same with the Ed Chynoweth Cup and Ed Chynoweth or the Hobey Baker Award and Hobey Baker.  Drowning in policies can obscure the fact that a Major Junior league does award a notable trophy named after the subject of this article.  I don't think that should be ignored no matter what policy is cited to the contrary, especially since there are some sources cited and common sense tells us we are talking about a 40+ year past topic. RonSigPi (talk) 00:21, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @RonSigPi, you're forgetting to notice that your examples did other things that made them notable, besides the trophy. Stanley was a politician. Chynoweth was a builder and league president. Baker is a HHOF player. Jim Mahon did nothing else notable. His death in a horrific accident is tragic, but amounts to nothing more than 15 minutes of fame. Wikipedia is not a memorial for a local hero. The only coverage on this boy is from his home team and the team he played for. Flibirigit (talk) 01:14, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You think I am forgetting that Lord Stanley of Preston was Governor General of Canada? Of course I understand that he would be notable without the trophy.  My point was that usually notable people have trophies named after them and that fact usually increases their notability.  If I gave the NHL a trophy to present to the top right winger of the year, would they start awarding it along with the Hart Memorial Trophy?  I think not - because I am not notable.  But they might in honor of someone notable in their time that died.  I don't think it is appropriate to discount the trophy being named after the subject and still presented to this day.  I think everyone is forgetting that even without the trophy I said weak keep and Rlendog's comments didn't change my position - I am still at weak keep.  I simply think the community needs to consider the fact that since the year of his death the OHL has continued to award the Jim Mahon Memorial Trophy. RonSigPi (talk) 03:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No one is "forgetting" that you are advocating "weak keep," given that those words haven't been stricken from your response, so I'm unsure what point you're trying to make with that. I'm also not sure what point you're trying to make by comparing members of the Hockey Hall of Fame to a teenage amateur with a couple good junior seasons under his belt (if not an utterly absurd one), or by comparing the highly notable trophies named in their honor with one awarded to the highest scoring right winger in the OHL. (Let's say that I'm nowhere near sold as to the notability of that trophy, amidst the 28 other trophies the league awards with articles, many of which call out for redirects.) If there are sources from independent, reliable, third-party sources that both meet the GNG and don't run afoul of ROUTINE, produce them.   Ravenswing   09:06, 30 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect: to the trophy. Sorry, folks, but the strictly local nature of the articles run afoul of GEOSCOPE, ROUTINE and NOTMEMORIAL altogether.  Like Flibirigit, I'd be interested in 18abruce telling us about these "multiple" books, and whether they're all indeed about the subject, or to what degree the subject's mentioned; a dozen fleeting mentions still come out to 0+0+0+0=0.  Finally, as we all know, WP:V and the GNG require not that we speculate that sources might be available (or might be difficult to find), but that such sources are demonstrated to exist as a prerequisite for saving the article.   Ravenswing   12:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect for now unless these other book sources are produced. I don't see the multiple sources that don't run afoul of geoscope and routine. While it is an otherstuff argument, since naming of trophies is mentioned above I must note that it is fairly common for us to redirect non-notable juniors to trophies named after them such as Six Broncos players and Renault. Just because you have a trophy named or dedicated to you doesn't make you notable. Often in the cases of death it would be a WP:ONEEVENT situation. -DJSasso (talk) 12:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * redirect I don't see the coverage or achievements to show an individual article is deserved. An untimely death doesn't make you notable. The trophy is the only reason he's known.Sandals1 (talk) 15:34, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge then redirect to Jim Mahon Memorial Trophy. Ifnord (talk) 12:32, 2 January 2018 (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.