Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kendy Batista


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 07:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Kendy Batista

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

Unbundling from Articles for deletion/Jose Diaz (baseball player). Good faith gnews/gsearch has not turned up WP:RS other than passing mentions and stat pages. Batista has pitched 1 inning at the AAA level, but has now been released. Is this enough to meet the requirements of WP:ATHLETE? I'm unsure, but leaning towards no. Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete trusting nominators good faith search. Per my comments at Articles for deletion/Juan Richardson.  The reference is not significant coverage, it is saying all the players that were let go.  It's enough to prove that he played minor league baseball, but not enough to establish Notability.--kelapstick (talk) 15:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and reasoning of Kelapstick. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Minor League baseball players are under contract with a 'Professional' team, having to be stored in lower class teams, but still 'professional' players with stats. These type of minor league stub can further knowledge of the player by fans in the seats (with Blackberries etc, thus more webhits) or team scouts. WP:ATHLETE and 'people of notability' doesn't take into account that a 'player' and a 'person' of notability are two different things.  A 'person' is vague to define. A 'player' of notability, say a minor league baseball player, does have stats and awards to his name sometimes, and these stubs can add perfectly to what Wikipedia was meant to be in the first place!  I have reliable references and always note the stubs accordingly.Gjr rodriguez (talk) 21:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Not only are some statistic sites just stats on a webpage, they also carry 'history', 'contact information','stadium information', what can be considered "signifigant coverage" with more research available on player beyond just the stats. The websites I reference are more than just a stat site.  The stat sites are referenced for the stat tables, the bio info is from different sources melded and noted accordinglyGjr rodriguez (talk) 21:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * And i suspect that when there is full coverage of local newspapers in GNews/GBooks, a project that is has begun, we will find articles in their home towns or where they have played. These teams are major fixtures in many smaller cities. The next recourse of those who want to go by formal sourcing is predictable, they will redefine significant coverage in such a way as to keep out whatever articles they on some intuitive basis want to keep out. There are already cases where we have in effect added "non-local" to the definition of what counts. Wouldn't it be better to go by some fixed standard, easy to determine and hard to dispute once it is settled? My feeling is to compromise at some number of AA or AAA level games or seasrsons. DGG (talk) 00:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete - Statistics or brief mentions in articles about minor league teams do not constitute "significant coverage in reliable sources," as required by WP:N. BRMo (talk) 04:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable as an athlete. Esasus (talk) 15:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:ATHLETE's requirement of playing in a fully professional league. Borgarde (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2009 (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.