Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Leuer


 * 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) Peter Karlsen (talk) 01:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Jon Leuer

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Delete. Does not meet notability for college athletes. Has not won a national award or inducted into the Hall of Fame or established a national record. All coverage and media attention is related to team stats and rankings with the University of Wisconsin. Cindamuse (talk) 10:39, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I like how there's a higher bar for college athletes on major teams, making them have to meet a higher standard that one year ago. However, some of the references are specifically about him. So he meets the general notability guidelines. If this does get deleted as non-notable, I will be willing to restore to someone's userspace after he becomes notable enough to meet the standards.  Royal broil  14:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * For the record, I'm commenting that my assessment concludes that he has meet criteria #3 on the college athletes' notability guidelines because national media have written articles specifically about him. And TipSweeny, please don't remove my name from my comments.  Royal broil  22:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Jon Leuer has accomplished a great deal. He is on the watch list to win college basketball's prestigous John Wooden Award and picked for first team Big Ten. The following players have never been first team All-Big Ten nor named to the Wooden Award watch list: Blake Hoffarber, Ralph Sampson III, Damian Johnson, Jason Bohannon, Chris Kramer, Mark Titus, Dallas Lauderdale, Jon Diebler, Delvon Roe, Jeffrey Jordan, D.J. Richardson. However, each and every one of them has a wikipedia page. I only got these names from checking 6 Big Ten rosters from last year. There are probably many more. I have been told that Leuer does not factor in from a notability perspective. What he has accomplished is more notable than every Big Ten player (including the ones listed) except perhaps the four who are on the All-Big Ten team with him (all of whom have a wikipedia page). It says he has not won a national reward on the deletion request: Being named to the Wooden List and the USA basketball select teams are national awards. I guess I do not comprehend how so many players are notable enough to receive a wikipedia page, but one who has more accolades then most of them is not. Tipsweeney (talk) 04:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Royalbroil, Sorry about the name deletion. It was an accident; an accidental edit I didn't realize went through.Tipsweeney (talk) 04:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. You can find more information about notability for college athletes here. You can also find more information here. Please make sure to sign your comments and posts on Wikipedia with four tildes ~ . Thanks.Cindamuse (talk) 16:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions.  — Royal  broil  22:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep According to Notability_(sports), "College athletes and coaches are notable if they have been the subject of non-trivial media coverage beyond merely a repeating of their statistics", Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Either the nominator didn't perform a Google search and see the hundreds of individual page hits that came up, or I don't understand how to differentiate between individual and team coverage. Unless someone can explain the second option in a way that explains all the Google hits, I vote keep. Bds69 (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please focus your comments on the article rather than other editors. That said, I performed a search and did not find significant coverage that was independent of the subject's individual/team stats and rankings. As far as the coverage, there are a lot of assertions, but nobody outside of User:Morbidthoughts is offering any links, and the links that are provided, in my opinion, does not equate to significant. Respectfully, Cindamuse (talk) 07:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The criteria I quoted that not mandate that the coverage be "significant", which I believe it is. It mandates the coverage be non-trivial beyond a mere repetition of stats. Those articles I linked that satisfies this criteria were easily found through Google news so I am wondering what you are looking at, and why you're arguing for something not in the guideline. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:40, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I apologize if that was worded as to mean I was focusing on the nominator and not the article - my comment was supposed to focus on what the meaning of individual and team coverage is, and I only meant for the nominator (or anyone else) to point out if my understand was wrong.  To me, the way I understand it is a blurb on a team page or along with team stats is insufficient, whereas individual articles are enough to be notable.  With my rationale, Leuer passes, but I meant to draw attention to the fact that I may be misunderstanding the policy.  Apologies for sounding like I was trying to call out a fellow editor. Bds69 (talk) 20:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Big Ten sports receives a LOT of coverage (they have their own national TV network for God's sake), and Leuer is one of the top players in that league. This is a good example of where I think the published notability standards for college athletes don't match the coverage the top 6 leagues truly get.  Leuer is generally considered one of the top 50-75 players in the country, as evidenced by his inclusion on the Wooden preseason list. In any case, there is a good deal of coverage on him as an individual vs. just as a member of his team. Rikster2 (talk) 13:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I agree that the notability standards are a bit incongruous pertaining to college athletes. That said, the Big Ten Network is notable and as such, has a separate article. The notability of the Big Ten is not inherited by the many athletes that play in the league. And inclusion on the Wooden preseason list does not establish notability. Now, if he were to be actually honored with the award, that would be another story. As far as the coverage, there are a lot of assertions, but nobody outside of User:Morbidthoughts is offering any links, and the links that are provided, in my opinion, does not equate to significant. Respectfully, Cindamuse (talk) 07:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - but my point is that the BEST players from the Big Ten are notable in a way that the best players from leagues that get less coverage are not. I was merely illustrating that the Big Ten is a big enough media engine to have it's own network. Rikster2 (talk) 17:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Here are more links to add to the ones User:Morbidthoughts posted. In addition, since this deletion page started, Leuer was named Sports Illustrated's preseason Big Ten Player of the year.  Tipsweeney (talk) 14:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)


 * KEEP* Jon Leuer is one of the top college basketball players in the county. I vote to keep. Leuer playes for a top 25 team with the Wisconsin Badgers and he is on the Wooden preseason watch list. It would be a shame to NOT keep this page! carthage44 (talk) 18:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. The criteria for notability does not include being a top player, a member of a top 25 team or being on the Wooden preseason watch list. Respectfully, Cindamuse (talk) 07:18, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - the criteria is also a "guideline," but your point is well taken Rikster2 (talk) 13:22, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment #3 on the nobility clause states: "Gained national media attention as an individual, not just as a player for a notable team." He was just named Sports Illustrated Preseason Big Ten Player of the Year, he is a finalist of the Wooden Award, he was named as the best college player in America by Jay Wright (Villanova Coach), he juust had a cover article on ESPN written about him (which was written by the very notable Andy Katz and the link was provided by MorbidThoughts), he was named to the USA select basketball team, and he was named to the preseason All-Big Ten team. When I see all of the other Big Ten players who have wiki articles (none of whom are the preseason player of the year), I cannot seem to understand what criteria is necessary to allow this very notable figure to have a Wikipedia page. Tipsweeney (talk) 14:41, 4 November 2010 (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.