Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lizy Coleman


 * 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. The reasons for deletion here are stronger and more policy-based than the reasons for retention. MuZemike 17:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Lizy Coleman

 * – (View AfD) (View log · AfD statistics)

Non-notable athletic trainer. None of the given references support notability or even mention Coleman. PDCook (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete What exactly is this woman's claim to notability? Vartanza (talk) 03:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * My guess is the page author believes that Coleman's involvement with a professional sports team makes her notable, but seeing as Coleman is not an athlete, WP:GNG is at play here and Coleman clearly fails that. PDCook (talk) 04:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 01:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Fails WP:BIO. Ray  Talk 19:35, 11 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Retain Clearly meets WP:GNG Legal exception explained below, meeting WP:BIO.  Coleman as a noted in the guidelines of notability is presented in the manner of leaders of support in the sporting arena. The references indicate positions of notability, the results of the supported athletes is the determinant for notability.  HIPAA guidelines prohibit the naming of specific patients without their consent.  Clearly notable Olympic and Professional athletes would not want the specifics of their injuries known.

This is the first in a series of Professional ATC's who's performances go under the notability radar but without whom there would be a vacuum for the talent that steps on the ice, field, pitch or green each day.

Just as Caddies are listed as notable persons for the professional Golfers they support, professional ATC's should receive the credit and recognition they are due.

Clearly the people/persons who created the Carolina Railhawks listing thought Coleman was important enough to list Paul9194558787 (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Again, I would like to point out that none of the given references even mention Coleman. PDCook (talk) 00:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment -

Elizabeth Coleman Raleigh, NC License Number: 1184 Effective: 2/6/2006 Renewal: January 31, 2010 Requires search modification for source document from Coleman licensed by State of North Carolina 24.211.165.40 (talk) 01:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment -- It may well be true that trainers deserve more recongition, but that is not the role of Wikipedia. Instead, one should go out into the world and change it so that trainers receive their due, and then bring that information back to Wikipedia.  Ms. Coleman, no matter how important she may be, does not have the media coverage (yet!) to establish notability Vartanza (talk) 16:24, 13 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment -- In a world where print media is succumbing to a rapid death, the role of Wikipedia as a source of information about relevant individuals is critical to the devlopment of various arenas of society. Additionally I am unsure how to list relevant TV appearances on Fox Soccer Channel and upon USLLive.com webcasts where Coleman was clearly visible and attending to the tasks which make her notable. Paul9194558787 (talk) 02:34, 17 December 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.