Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hartwell


 * 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 keep. Barely passes the WP:N guideline. Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

John Hartwell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable figure. KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 05:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep NCAA Division I athletic directors are generally presumed to be notable, and inspection of Hartwell in particular turns up plenty of coverage in reliable third-party sources. He is indeed notable. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * "Generally presumed"? – List of NCAA Division I athletic directors – Almost none of them are. He just got a job. What's notable about him? KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 06:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * He and other NCAA Division I ADs are notable because of the amount of coverage that NCAA Division I sports, and its athletic directors, receive. Jweiss11 (talk) 06:12, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC with sources like this, and this, and this, and this, and this. Ejgreen77 (talk) 22:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Articles linked by Ejgreen77 show that he passes WP:GNG. Cbl62 (talk) 23:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete – Look at those articles – they merely mention that he got the job. Lots of "figures" are mentioned in passing, yet are not notable. Until he becomes "a somebody", he's still a nobody. What are you going to do with those 5 articles, all reporting exactly the same thing? Post the Wiki article on him, saying, " ? Seriously? 5 references for a single thing worth saying about him? It makes sense to delete it for now, and if he ever does anything noteworthy, then recreate it. :-\ KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 18:33, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Knowledgebattle, I don't think you're supposed to log a delete vote like this on an AfD that you opened. We know you want this article deleted.  That's why you nominated it.  As for the subject of Hartwell's notability, when articles in five notable newspapers are written about someone simply getting a job, then there's probably something notable about simply getting that job.  Athletic directors like Hartwell are also typically covered in articles about the hiring and firing of various coaches that work for them, and the development of athletic facilities at the colleges where they work.  All of this might seem trivial to you, but it is notable where it is covered by notable and realiable third-party sources.  Your pejorative and factually erroneous characterization of Hartwell as "just some school football coach" on your user page does not speak well for your objectivity here. Jweiss11 (talk) 02:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This is yet another feature story, continued onto a second page (here), reporting in depth on Hartwell. Cbl62 (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh! Well great! Out of the abyss, someone has managed to scrounge something up about him. If any of it's noteworthy, then throw it in there! I'll even read it! KnowledgeBattle | TalkPage | GodlessInfidel ┌┬╫┴┼╤╪╬╜ 16:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Always nice to see people keeping an open mind. Cbl62 (talk) 20:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - WP:ATH makes no mention of athletic directors being automatically notable. Notability therefore defaults to WP:ANYBIO, which does not appear to support notability.  After being named athletic director there was some ephemeral media attention, though there appears little coverage of him aside from that in reliable sources.  In addition, this person has not been nominated or won a well-known and significant award or honor, and has not made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his specific field, per WP:ANYBIO. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:ATH makes no mention of athletic directors being automatically notable. Notability therefore defaults to WP:ANYBIO, which does not appear to support notability.  After being named athletic director there was some ephemeral media attention, though there appears little coverage of him aside from that in reliable sources.  In addition, this person has not been nominated or won a well-known and significant award or honor, and has not made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his specific field, per WP:ANYBIO.  Magnolia677 (talk) 22:29, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I struck the above which is a duplicate vote by the same editor. Each editor is entitled to vote only once. ;) Cbl62 (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as the matter at hand is still whether he's solid for independent notability and I'm not seeing any convincing signs of that, Delete at best for now. SwisterTwister   talk  02:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - there's no inherent notability in athletic directors. Other than routine news coverage, there's not enough in-depth sourcing to show they pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with you in part, i.e., there is no SNG holding that athletic directors are "inherently" notable. Accordingly, athletic directors should be assessed under GNG.  In this case, the coverage is significant and plainly surpasses WP:ROUTINE, which might consist of simple hiring announcements in a "Sports Transactions" column or a brief article announcing a hiring or resignation.  What we have here are more detailed stories about Hartwell.  The feature story I referenced above (here and here) is the antithesis of "routine" coverage. Together with the sources cited by Ejgreen above, Hartwell is a GNG pass IMO. Cbl62 (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. I find it incredible that people should think there is no notability inherent in this very major position--at least in a major athletic university. I am not greatly interested in college athletics, but from even a casual reading of the news it is obvious that there individuals play a central role in their campuses.  DGG ( talk ) 04:25, 14 April 2016 (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.