Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Selenski


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Joe Selenski

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I declined a PROD on this article because the prodder didn't use an edit summary. Original PROD rationale was Non-notable low-level coach who fails to meet notability requirements. Furthermore, I couldn't find anything substantial in google news. Ron Ritzman (talk) 05:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC) Selenski was the original coach of the Johnstown Chiefs, a team that made their start in the AAHL before eventually moving onto the ECHL for the next twenty-two seasons. If needed, I can add more information via old newspapers (yes, it would require much digging from the local library), but I thought providing a base would at least help. jasonstru (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 05:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: There's no presumption of notability for coaches in the low minors. If Selenski can be shown to pass the GNG - and not just quotes from him in terms of routine sports coverage, but articles which discuss him in "significant detail" - that might be a different matter.   Ravenswing  13:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No notability here, no sources that proove it. There aren't many low-level coaches who would have articles written about them versus just containing quotes from them. I don't think this one is an exception. -DJSasso (talk) 14:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling I'm fighting a losing battle here, but why is Selenski notable? a)he helped with the foundation of the Johnstown Chiefs, and b)he was the first coach to win the Riley Cup (now Kelly Cup), awarded to the team that wins the ECHL's championship. Yes, Selenski's ACHL experience is low-minor hockey. I'm not disputing that. But his work in the AAHL (which was the predecessor to the ECHL) and his time with the Chiefs and Thunderbirds is relevant. I hope I'm not giving off the wrong tone here (fighting the flu at the moment so I'm not feeling so great), but I thought wikipedia was to help provide sourced information and not for a group to determine what is "notable" and what is not. jasonstru (talk)
 * He may have been important, to his teams. I do not dispute that. However, on wikipedia, notability is based on news paper articles being done about him or books being written about him etc etc. This is where the disconnect is. He needs to meet WP:GNG. -DJSasso (talk) 17:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, it's a common mistake, especially among newcomers, Jasonstru, that when we say "notable" here we mean "He's important." That's not the case; we mean "Fulfills Wikipedia guideline requirements for notability."   Ravenswing  19:11, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, and thanks for not going off on the noob. Can I at least ask for more time on this? I have one book that mentions him and as mentioned above, I'd need to do some digging for official newspaper releases since we are talking about 20+ years. jasonstru (talk)
 * The AfD runs seven days, Jason, so you've a few days left. You can also do what we call "userfy," in putting the article off your talk page (looking something like User:jasonstru/Joe Selenski) so that you can work on it at your own pace and repost it into articlespace when you feel you've brought it to WP:GNG standard.   Ravenswing  00:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per above.  Patken4 (talk) 23:52, 26 January 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.


 * Done. Consider myself retired. Trying to fight the battle with wiki-heroes.