Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond Martin (canoer)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:05, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Raymond Martin (canoer)

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

Placed 7th at '84 Olympics in a single event. Had to make a few attempts on Google to assert it was not a hoax. Not notable enough to self-sustain an article. Merge into appropriate existing Olympic article. It's me...Sallicio!$\color{Red} \oplus$ 06:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC) This article is correct —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.200.4 (talk) 09:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article Canoeing at the 1984 Summer Olympics only mentions the medal winners, so merging would throw the whole article structure out of whack. Since Olympic athletes are considered notable per WP:ATHLETE he needs to be covered somewhere, so his own article is the best place, even if the resulting article is a stub. (Note: Merging this into the appropriate Olympics page would not have required deletion at any points. Merges are supposed to be followed up with a redirect to retain the edit history.) - Mgm|(talk) 11:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Regardless of anyone's individual view on whether everyone who competed in the Olympics should have an article, this is one of the most soundly established precedents here. We don't officially follow precedent--but in practice this would amount to changing consensus about something that has been approved hundreds of times by the great majority of interested people.  At present "notability" = a separate article, not a merged section. Perhaps that should change also, and in fact the guideline says that justifying an article by WP:N does not mean that one must have one--but again, this would be  a very major change in established practice, and this is not the time or place to make it--even though I might just possibly support it myself. DGG (talk) 20:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a clear keep, for reasons outlined above. I have added a reference and some more information, removing the hoax tag. Parslad (talk) 22:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 10:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets the notability requirement WP:ATHLETE. WWGB (talk) 12:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep He may not be known by most, but he passes the athlete notability guidline.User:MrRadioGuy What's that?/What I Do/Feed My Box 00:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, easily meets WP:ATHLETE. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC).
 * Keep - Meets WP:ATHLETE. He has competed in the Olympic Games. Untick (talk) 14:55, 21 March 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.