Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnathan Loyd


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Johnathan Loyd

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable college athlete, fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC UW Dawgs (talk) 18:57, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I fail to see what is non-notable about the winningest men's basketball player at a D1 school in a prominent conference. I sincerely hope that your UW fandom isn't bleeding over into your objectivity here. Athies22 (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The article lists Oregon's achievements as his achievements. Did he win individual conference awards or other individual awards that are notable? and is he playing professional anywhere? Littlekelv (talk) 02:19, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  05:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  05:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  05:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment It seems like he got quite a bit of coverage - not as much for being any kind of school recordholder as a basketball player, but for his transition to football after four years on the Oregon basketball team. He had a completely unremarkable football season, but it looks like it's pretty rare for players to utilize a fifth year of college eligibility by switching sports. I'm not sure if this would fall under WP:BLP1E, but the story was covered by the Associated Press, CBS Sports, USA Today, NBC Sports, ESPN, NFL.com, and SI.com. He has played in Europe with ETB Wohnbau, but that looks like it's in Pro A, the second-highest league in Germany, so that doesn't factor into notability. EricEnfermero (Talk) 06:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep a simple click on the "news" link above shows ample significant third party coverage in reliable sources on the subject. Clearly passes WP:GNG.  Article needs to be edited to include this information, not deleted.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I'm trying hard to be consistent here in my application of the GNG "significant coverage" standard as we apply it to college athletes; sometimes that means a "delete" when there's lots of media mentions but the coverage does not rise to the level of "significant," and sometimes it means keeping an article (like this one) when there is significant national-level coverage, but the subject is not "deserving" of a stand-alone article on the subjective merits. This guy's senior year of NCAA Division I basketball may be summarized as "seven points and 4.7 assists per game his senior year," and his 4-year career as "played in a school-record 144 career games and 97 Oregon wins".  He was a decent contributor on a good team; that's not the stuff that hall-of-fame careers are made of.  The reason he ultimately received significant coverage was he was a rare instance of a college athlete who was able to take advantage of the NCAA's fifth-year eligibility rule.  As a football wide receiver, he appeared in nine games, caught four passes for 19 yards, and played on an Oregon Ducks team that appeared in the last BCS championship game.  He's a footnote with coverage.  My ideal solution?  We should have an article about the NCAA's fifth-year rule, this subject should be one of the listed examples, and this article should be a redirect.  Until someone creates that article about the NCAA's fifth-year rule, however, I think we're stuck with this stand-alone article about Johnathan Loyd.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:09, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * hmmm It's a point, that's true. But our measure is "significant coverage" not "significant accomplishments" -- Rudy Ruettiger for example:  1 game, 2 plays, 1 tackle.  But it became a movie.  While this example isn't as extreme, it's part of the points to consider.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:14, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets gng with sources nbcsports.com, nfl.com, etc.  It doesn't matter if it's not because he's the greatest basketball player, but because of his switch to football - it's still significant coverage, and that equates to notability. Jacona (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak Meh. Whereas Dirtlawyer's "weak keep" is probably the technically correct outcome, the accomplishments are so minimal that I really can't muster more than a "weak meh". Cbl62 (talk) 02:01, 19 January 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.