Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julius James


 * 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, as correctly pointed out below:  meeting part 2 of WP:ATHLETE, which says explicitly: Competitors and coaches who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them.   Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  20:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Julius James

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested PROD. Has not made an appearance in a fully professional league so fails WP:ATHLETE. robwingfield «T•C» 20:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. robwingfield «T•C» 20:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's not a contested prod - it's an invalid prod. This article has already survived one AFD and thus the prod template is invalid. He was a three-time Big East defensive player of the year and one of only two three-time winners of a major college soccer award .  He meets the WP:BIO requirement of coverage in external reliable sources - .  He was the 9th overall pick in the MLS draft.  We're not talking about a random free agent.  He obviously meets our inclusion guidelines. --B (talk) 22:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:BIO. The article can easily be restored if he ever plays professionally. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  22:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 23:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete' - college soccer is not professional, so the subject fails WP:ATHLETE. --Angelo (talk) 08:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The rule also allows for amateur athletes about whom there are reliable sources to be included. One wikiproject's decree that American college soccer players are non-notable doesn't override the general notability criterion. --B (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: While WP:ATHLETE is often cited as an exclusive reason for deletion, reading the section heading at Notability (people) is instructional. quote Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included.  Waving around WP:ATHLETE criteria as if notability established in normal ways (non-trivial coverage in multiple reputable sources) can be ignored is simply bad for the project. Neier (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:ATHLETE even says that amateur athletes can be included if they meet the general notability criterion. But that part of the guideline is ignorable. --B (talk) 22:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:ATHLETE Ban  Ray  09:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You may want to check out User:B/NCAA data. This is a list of articles that use the NCAA template - virtually all of them are US college athletes.  Appearing in a fully pro league is not nor has ever been a requirement for an article to exist.  Having reliable external sources of information is the ONLY requirement. WP:ATHLETE even says that amateurs about whom there are reliable sources of information are considered notable. --B (talk) 17:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it says that about competitors in amateur sports. Once again, football is a professional sport.  Yes, it can be played at an amateur level, but that doesn't mean that there are "two levels" of the sport.  It simply means that those who play at amateur level aren't good enough to play professionally.  Wikipedia currently views such people as not notable.  robwingfield «T•C» 18:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep like all the others. ugen64 (talk) 20:27, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Do you enjoy having the same arguments week in and week out? It's beyond stupid to keep "some" MLS players and not "others".  Since the president has already been set that the MLS players in the 2008 MLS Draft should stay (much to the chagrin of some power tripping people around here) the rest should stay and then sort the players out later.  And yes, just because X doesn't mean Y, blah blah blah, but then again I think most of the people against this are from Europe and don't really know how the NCAA works.  Shame. GauchoDude (talk) 09:30, 18 March 2008 (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.