Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jo Matumoto


 * 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The result was Withdrawn by nom. -DJSasso (talk) 18:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Jo Matumoto

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Potentially non-notable minor league baseball figure. He only played in the United States' minor leagues for three years and in Japan, I don't believe he ever played at their highest level of competition. He did appear in a few international competitions, so he has that going for him. Alex (talk) 05:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions.  — I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 05:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep As a member of the Brazil national baseball team, he meets WP:NSPORTS by having "participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level." Regardless, he meets WP:GNG with significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  More sources have been added since the AfD nomination; there are currently 8 in the article itself, and they are pretty significant coverage and not WP:ROUTINE. The novelty of a Japanese-Brazilian, who is the top pitcher on his country's national team, trying out in MLB for the first time at age 36 drew a lot of coverage and notability. —Bagumba (talk) 07:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep due to his participation in the South American Games. Spanneraol (talk) 12:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Member of the Brazil national baseball team, also competed in South American Games which clearly satisfies WP:NSPORTS. Come on.  Agent Vodello OK, Let's Party, Darling! 15:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Quick question: Do the South American Games count as the "highest level" of international competition? I'm not so sure about that, based on my reading. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It really does not. Any international competition is not the "highest level" of international competition. That is an ambiguity in the rules that should be revised. Alex (talk) 19:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I would say that the Olympics (for baseball, the WBC) would count as the "highest level of international competition. Besides, we know your opinion on this. I was asking others for their particular opinions on the South American Games. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Bagumba. Rlendog (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep. Per Bagumba.  Just another of nom's recent nominations that have garnered zero support.  He may wish to consider whether his views of notability are at odds with those of the community, to save the community more waste of time, so they can direct that time to more productive pursuits at the Project.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:01, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Using "snow keep" as much as you do kind of diminishes its effect, haha. And uh, also my friend, most of my nominations end up being deleted, so I think I get support more times than not. Alex (talk) 19:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK -- how about "Nom -- given the unanimous view that this article should be kept, please consider withdrawing your nomination, to save your fellow editors the time that would be otherwise wasted here given that this does not appear to have a snowball's chance of being deleted at this AfD". Alternatively, this can be snow kept.  Based on the unanimous view of all five editors who have commented on this nomination, it meets the criteria for a snow keep.  And I don't see how snow-keeping an article when it deserves to be snow kept, due to unanimous rejection of the deletion suggestion of the nom, at all diminishes its effect.  This is precisely the sort of nomination that "snow" was created for.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:43, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I dont see the need for the personal attack on Alex. The person's notability was not readily apparent until he nominated the article for AfD.  So this directly improved the quality of the article and WP, which I can only see as productive.  Personally, I'm more disappointed with the article creator for not keeping the article in their user page until there was minimum evidence in the article as to why a minor league player should be considered notable so an AfD would never be in question. —Bagumba (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Bag -- I don't see a need for a personal attack either. Nor was one engaged in.  Please distinguish that from comments that relate strictly to an editor's editing.  Otherwise, you may be inappropriately accusing an editor of a personal attacks, which is .. as you may guess .. uncivil, and possibly a personal attack.  Also, please note that AfD is not to be used for article cleanup.  Also, please note that nom should be conducting a wp:before search prior to nominating an article for AfD.  If, in conducting his search, he finds that refs exist in the real world, it is not appropriate for him to nom the article.  He should be making nom decisions based on whether such refs can be found, not on whether they are in the article.  This is another basic tenet of our AfD guidelines.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:38, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn Ehh, I guess you guys are right. Alex (talk) 13:04, 21 July 2011 (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.