Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maurice Lloyd


 * 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. Hut 8.5 19:43, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Maurice Lloyd

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

Articles main author placed a "hang-on" request (most probably in good faith) but the article has never been speedied - however on my reading (without an expertise on this type of sport and its various leagues) I have moved to AfD for further consultation. I offer no personal opinion at this time. -- VS talk 11:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Plays in the CFL. Top level of football in Canada.  IMHO should pass WP:ATHLETE.  Article needs a little work but notable.--Cube lurker (talk) 14:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. "top level in a country" shouldn't include non-Canadians that are only playing in the CFL because they simply aren't better then the thousand players in the NFL, and couldn't get a job there. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 17:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually per WP:ATHLETE the standard is fully professional league. I don't think there's an arguement that the CFL is fully professional.  I think it'd be an awful precedent to say that a professional athlete in Canada would be notable if he'd been born in Canada but since he was born in the US, not notable.--Cube lurker (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not too fond of the "professional league of any country" notability guideline. It has lots of holes. For example, If some Slovakians get together and decide to make a 4-team American football league where admission costs are some soda, they are the top professional league in Slovokia. Applying wp:athlete correctly, would make all the players in the league deserving of a Wikipedia article. I'm not saying that the CFL is analogous to my hypothetical, I'm just saying that this wp:athlete application can, at times, violate the spirit of Wikipedia's notability policy. If some dude can't get a job anywhere in the NFL and barely manages to get onto some CFL team, he is clearly not a notable football player. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 01:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're saying even if i differ in opinion. My feelings, the CFL isn't the NFL,  but it is the 2nd highest pro football league in the world.  It's broadcast on canada's top cable sports network, and carried on US sports channels.  I wouldn't argue if it was a group of weekend warriors playing hack football in some country where the public didn't know if the ball was blown up or stuffed.  But this is quality sports league, a degree lower then the absolute best in the world.  I see this more in line with a pro soccer player in the USA.  No where near the quality of European soccer, but notable.--Cube lurker (talk) 01:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep professional athlete. Article could be improved a lot, but stubs are ok.--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Took a closer look: regular player on the team that won the Grey Cup, started for 4 years at UConn in college... I'm okay with the article.  it needs work, of course... but that's an editing issue, not a afd issue.--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment So I've been putting in a little effort to clean up this article and add some good references. I gotta tell you, he is getting significant news coverage as an athlete in Canada, and not just in the Regina Leader-Post.  He is expressing major leadership qualities for the team and that is being acknowledged by the news media.  Check it out, please.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep "Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league" - enough said. But since enough is never enough, there are an awful lot of assumptions being made above. First, just because a U.S.-born player is playing in the CFL doesn't mean that they "can't get a job anywhere in the NFL". For many years and up until not too long ago, African-American quarterbacks couldn't get a sniff of starting jobs in the NFL no matter their skill level, and they came to Canada to establish themselves and have long and productive careers. It's also a logical fallacy that he isn't "better then the thousand players in the NFL" - he'd only need to not be better than the 32 starting middle linebackers and possibly their 32 backups to not be on an NFL roster, and even those are assumptions without a strong basis in fact. And how does starting 16 out of 18 games at a key position and being named to the year-end league all-star team equal "barely manages to get onto some CFL team". Are we seriously saying that Joe Theismann, Jeff Garcia, Rocket Ismail, and Warren Moon weren't notable until they joined the NFL, or that Damon Allen, the all-time professional career passing leader, should never be considered notable just because he never played in the NFL? That's quite a position to take. Besides, if those hypothetical Slovakians can get their league to the level where it's considered fully professional because they're being paid reasonable salaries for playing their games, and their games are carried on a national television network in Slovakia and are reported in-depth in major Slovakian newspapers, why shouldn't they be considered notable? Mlaffs (talk) 01:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Whatever opinions of whether a American CFLers are / start off as NFL rejects or not, the simple and unrefutable fact remains that they play at the top level of their/a sport, Canadian football, not to mention at a pro level, as per guidelines. Mayumashu (talk) 04:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep — Plays in the CFL, which is the highest level of football available in Canada. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - CFL players are notable. matt91486 (talk) 18:56, 27 June 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.