Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obi Egekeze


 * 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. Absent a consensus that satisfying WP:GNG should be insufficient in this case in favor of subject-specific notability guidelines, the GNG presumption of notability holds. postdlf (talk) 14:13, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Obi Egekeze

 * – ( View AfD View log )

An American football player. Article states he played for University of Maryland. College days are notable per NFOOTBALL#College_athletes. He was signed by the Omaha Nighthawks of the United Football League (UFL), but was released before season was started. I don't believe the UFL is a top-level league per WP:NFOOTBALL. Bgwhite (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  —Bgwhite (talk) 17:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  —Bgwhite (talk) 17:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Note The deletion debate of Justin Watts is mentioned often here.  Here is Watt's debate.  Also note, the consensus was to delete Watt. Bgwhite (talk) 20:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:NFOOTBALL is for what we "silly Americans" call "soccer" and not American football. That said, the player does not appear to meet the automatic qualifications of WP:NSPORTS or WP:ATHLETE--HOWEVER, there is a significant amount of coverage that I can see in Google News which should be enough to pass the general notability guideline.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. He was a two-year starter at a big-time football program, ranks among the Top 10 scoring leaders in Maryland Terrapins football history (dating back to the 1890s), was twice selected as an Academic All-ACC player, and there's enough non-trivial coverage of his collegiate football career at Maryland to meet the WP:GNG standard.  There have been multiple stories specifically about him (i.e., not statistic reports or passing references in game coverage) in The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Washington Times, and The Washington Examiner.  A few examples that pop up from a google search (the first five being feature stories about Egekeze): (1) Terps' Egekeze Stays Positive: After Missing First Five Kicks, Senior Has Made Five in a Row, The Washington Post, Oct. 4, 2008; (2) To win job, Egekeze reboots; Kicker revamped game, landed position on his third try, The Washington Times, Sept. 11, 2007; (3) For Maryland kicker Egekeze, it's now all good, The Washington Examiner, Nov. 5, 2008; (4) Giving slump the boot: After 0-for-5 start to begin season that nearly cost him his job, kicker Egekeze finds footing, gets back in groove for Terps, The Sun (Baltimore), Nov. 6, 2009; (5) Egekeze's misfires concern Terps, The Washington Times, September 19, 2008; (6) Egekeze unseats Ennis as Terps' starting kicker, The Sun (Baltimore, Md.), Aug 20, 2006; (7) Terps' Ennis, Egekeze seek job, August 20, 2006, The Washington Times; (8) Egekeze's Margin for Error, The Washington Post, Sept. 19, 2008; (9) A week later for Obi, The Washington Times, Sept. 22, 2008; (10) Egekeze, Ennis unable to solidify kicking job, CSTV U-Wire, April 26, 2006; (11) Egekeze is Alive and Kickin', Testudo Times, Sept. 18, 2008; (12) Terps? Egekeze boots No. 17 UNC in 17-15 upset, The Washington Examiner, Nov. 16, 2008; (13) Egekeze's big kick moves Terrapins into first place, The Augusta Chronicle, Nov. 19, 2008; (14) Q&A With Place-Kicker Obi Egekeze: Special teams leader discusses academic success, the mentality of being a kicker and The Masters Golf Tournament, Maryland Football, July 1, 2008; (15) Egekeze Makes Another FG, The Washington Post, Sept. 20, 2008. Cbl62 (talk) 19:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Sorry but any all-conference college football players will receive alot of newspaper coverage.  See NFOOTBALL#College_athletes where this is addressed.  The above links by User:Cbl62 become irrelevant.  Has Obi Egekeze won a national award or inducted into the Hall of Fame, No.  So his college football days becomes non-notable. Bgwhite (talk) 20:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh boy, here we go again. All but one of those links provided are by a Washington, D.C. or Baltimore-based media outlet, which is the heart of UMD country. No kidding their football players are going to get coverage. Before this goes any further, I recommend everyone waiting to see how Articles for deletion/Justin Watts turns out, because frankly it's going to be the same points of contention for this, too. Getting cut from a United Football League team before the season even starts is not grounds for notability either, so at this point the base of the "keep" argument is that he was a notable college athlete, which I don't think he satisfies. Again, that leads to regional vs. national media coverage, and we should wait for the Justin Watts AfD to proceed with this one. Jrcla2 (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh boy is right. This is getting silly .  It is well established that a college athlete article is fine if there has been sufficient non-trivial coverage in independent, verifiable sources.  National news coverage is not and ought not be a requirement.  Egekeze satisfies the WP:GNG standard, and that shouldn't be controversial in this case.   The Washington Post and The Baltimore Sun are among the most respected major newspapers in the United States.  We can't, don't and shouldn't ignore such coverage in assessing notability.  And to suggest that this level of coverage is typical for every college football player is absolutely incorrect.  Very few college football players are the subject of multiple feature stories in multiple major daily papers.  Finally, this is completely different from Justin Watts, where the argument was made that Watts is a backup player who only gets covered because of the unusually rabid nature of North Carolina hoops fans.  Egekeze was a two-year starter whose story garnered extensive coverage on is merits. Cbl62 (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * How is this different from Justin Watts when you (Cbl62) voted to keep Justin Watts on the same arguments as to keep Obi Egekeze. If, a backup player deserves to be notable because they were covered by the local papers and a kicker deserves to be notable because they were covered by local papers, that means every member of a basketball or football team is notable.  I'm a fan of BYU.  They will be independent next year in football, thus no player on all-conference teams.  BYU gets larger press than normal in Arizona, Nevada and southern California because alot of BYU's players come from there and the higher percentage of Mormons in the area.  All four major local papers will have multiple stories about every mid to major contributor in basketball and football.  That would me every BYU player in now notable.  I don't think that is right.  Also, women's gymnastics and men's volleyball is bigger in Utah than other places and draws alot of local press.  So, now every volleyball and gymnastics person is now notable.  There has to be a line drawn.  If they are a great football player, they will be drafted into the NFL or for a basketball player, drafted or play oversees, thus becoming notable. Bgwhite (talk) 23:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The line has already been drawn at WP:GNG, and it does not mean (nor is anyone suggesting) that every college athlete is notable. When appropriate, I have voted to delete articles on many non-notable college athletes.  (E.g., Bacher, Missant, Frischknecht, Davis, Clayton, Castillo, Gilchrist, Summers.)  The line may not be a bright line which is what you apparently want, but bright lines aren't always best.  The existing rule under GNG requires us to use our judgment and assess the significance of any non-trivial coverage.  Cbl62 (talk) 23:51, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I for one never really bought the argument that "the subject is not notable because all that news coverage he gets doesn't count."--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete On the principle that a generally unaccomplished kicker who never played at the highest level is not notable and most of the coverage was WP:ROUTINE, I think we should delete per WP:GNG that "significant coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not appropriate for a stand-alone" —Bagumba (talk) 00:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * He's among the Top 10 scorers in Maryland history. Hardly "unaccomplished." Cbl62 (talk) 01:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I would have though Marylands own website would at least impress me with its lead for Egekeze, but if the consensus really is that a player whose  claim-to-fame is nothing more than he was a 2-year college kicker who was a two-time Academic All-ACC selection and is 10th on the schools scoring list, then to me that should be a red flag that we are looking to hard at the number of sources and not what the sources say this person actually did.  Again, "presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion." In any event, its up to the consensus. —Bagumba (talk) 06:03, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep- the coverage in multiple reliable sources is more than enough to establish notability based on the WP:GNG, and I'm not seeing any compelling reason why we should ignore that. Umbralcorax (talk) 01:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep coverage is quite extensive, although I prefer to limit college athlete articles to All-Americans and All-Conference players from major conferences. With the press providing easily accessible WP:RS, even otherwise unnotable players can document the wikipedia definition of notability with some press clippings.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bagumba and my comment on the Justin Watts AfD. Bamgumba is correct that satisfying the GNG establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, of notability. We, as editors, are still expected to use our best judgement. My judgement tells me that, based on the sources presented here and in the article, Egekeze is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. cmadler (talk) 18:33, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * So you agree he passes WP:GNG but are using your judgment to override the guideline? I really think that we ought not to be allowing subjective judgment to override WP:GNG and certainly not without a very strong reason to do so in a particular case.  Cbl62 (talk) 19:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Your reason to keep using WP:GNG and not using NFOOTBALL is known. You don't have to keep saying this every time someone comments to delete. Bgwhite (talk) 20:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Cbl62 (talk) 22:28, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The article doesnt pass WP:GNG if it failed the presumption that the subject was notable. This is explicitly allowed by GNG if the consensus finds the subject to be run-of-the-mill per WP:ROTM —Bagumba (talk) 23:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ROTM is a new one and plainly inapplicable. Some 2500 people have played football for the Maryland Terrapins program in the past 100-plus years, and Egekeze ranks among the Top 10 (top 99.9%) in career scoring.  With all due respect, that's the very antithesis of "run of the mill."  I frankly don't understand why some people try so hard to come up with arguments to delete articles on players who plainly satisfy GNG. Cbl62 (talk) 23:52, 4 April 2011 (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.