Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Merila


 * 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 no consensus. Davewild (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Mark Merila

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Consensus is that bullpen catchers must pass GNG. Merila does not appear to do so and his work as a scout and a minor league player also doesn't make him notable. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 19:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep There's more and I'll flesh it out later, but he played for Team USA in the 1993 Intercontinental Cup, which in my view satisfies WP:BASE/N. "Baseball figures are presumed notable if they...have participated in a major international competition." The Intercontinental Cup isn't a no-name tournament, it is run by the International Baseball Federation every two or four years since 1973. He was a First-Team All-American while with the Gophers of Minnesota. It looks like he has a hybrid case. All his accomplishments combined make a pretty notable guy. Like I said, though, I'll try to flesh this out more later. Here are just a few links I found on the first few pages of a Google search:, , Alex (talk) 03:07, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Alex, not everyone is a hybrid case. The Intercontinental Cup is not listed at BASE/N among the examples of a major international competition and being an All-American also isn't a BASE/N criteria. As Bbny-wiki-editor said elsewhere, "Being non-notable in two or three different areas doesn't somehow combine to make a person notable." Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Keep. A cursory glance through google shows that there are sources out there. Several feature articles covered his battle with brain cancer and there is coverage of his winning the Big 10 Conference Player of the Year honors, which is a fairly significant college accomplishment as well as the aforementioned all-american honors. I'm unsure as to if the intercontinental Cup is a significant international tournament (Alex has the wrong Cup linked above) but the other issues I think push him over the top. Spanneraol (talk) 21:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete In my opinion, it takes more than a couple local stories to pass GNG. Every year, hundreds of athletes are "conference player of the year" in various sports, and hundreds of people are profiled in local papers. - Bbny-wiki-editor (talk) 23:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not meet WP:BIO. --Inother (talk) 17:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't meet the notability standards for baseball players or college athletes. Having brain cancer is tragic, but not grounds for notability. The only real coverage is because he has the cancer, but that seems like WP:ONEEVENT and he's hardly unique in having cancer--he just has a higher visibility job than most. 204.126.132.231 (talk) 15:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The sources provided for him constitute either tribute-type coverage due to his illness, or routine coverage. The former is a step up from the typical coverage seen at AfD, but the fact that the articles are then less about him and more about what others are doing keeps me from immediately saying keep on him. I'll say neutral, weak delete if it has to be penciled in only because he could have easily had feature pieces on him, and doesn't quite do so. Wizardman  03:10, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Question. As a college All-American, doesn't he satisfy the requirements of WP:NCOLLATH for having "won a national award"? In college football, that certainly would be enough.  I'm not as familiar with the news coverage received by All-Americans in baseball.  Cbl62 (talk) 03:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think being a baseball All-American would meet the requirements. Either way, he still fails GNG. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 04:30, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are multiple articles about him in multiple contexts. And not just about "what others are doing," for example . Rlendog (talk) 13:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. The source found by Rlendog tipped the balance for me.  I've added it and a couple others to the article.  Merila was a truly elite player at the collegiate level.  He not only was an All-American (probably sufficient in and of itself under WP:NCOLLATH) and the Big Ten Conference Baseball Player of the Year, but he set multiple Minnesota Golden Gophers baseball batting records, including single-season batting average (.452), career batting average (.392), and career walks (187).  He was likely on his way to an MLB career, but he was stricken with a brain tumor at the end of his senior year.  Even so, his truly elite college career is enough.  There is abundant significant coverage, including feature stories in mainstream media publications, including the San Diego Union-Tribune, and in an authoritative book about the history of Minnesota Golden Gophers sports. Passes both WP:GNG and WP:NCOLLATH. Cbl62 (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment The baseball AfDs are lowering the "significant coverage" bar lower and lower by the week. All of the sources listed above, taken together, still don't come close to satisfying GNG. - Bbny-wiki-editor (talk) 21:10, 12 May 2015 (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.