Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ricardo Miller


 * 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. Secret account 15:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Ricardo Miller

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I created this article in February 2010 when Miller was a highly-touted recruit for the Michigan football team. He received a lot of press for his high school playing career and recruitment. However, he ended up as a complete "bust" at the college level. He barely appeared in any games for Michigan and then transferred to UMass where he again failed to become a notable player. In retrospect, my creation of this article was premature. The coverage he received as a high school athlete/recruit fails under WP:NHSPHSATH. Cbl62 (talk) 22:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Cbl62 (talk) 22:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable.--Yankees10 03:18, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Cbl62, I believe you clearly created an article that was WP:NHSPHSATH in 2010 and WP:NOTTEMPORARY. There was significant national coverage that went beyond local coverage. I am One of Many (talk) 03:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that, IAOOM. Given Miller's falling off the radar, this is an article that I felt should run through the AfD process. I'm fine with the outcome either way. Cbl62 (talk) 15:11, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete virtually all of the reliable sourcing is from the recruitment period. Fails the test of time. Nwlaw63 (talk) 13:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NGRIDIRON and WP:NCOLLATH. Being a highly sought after high school recruit is not enough to show notability.Mdtemp (talk)
 * Keep This is an example why I personally do not like it when editors write up articles about a recruit.  I still have to say keep since he passes WP:GNG.  There is significant coverage, it reliable and independent (i.e. ESPN, USAToday, Detroit Free Press, Orlando Sentinel, etc.).  Notability is not temporary so he should stay.  09er (talk) 16:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 16:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - albeit reluctantly, I'll admit. There's no such thing as "failing the test of time" when it comes to notability because notability is not temporary.  Miller has still been the subject of multiple reliable sources - while he was indeed a college bust, his notability is still valid provided there is enough to meet WP:BLP given that he is a living person, which there appears to be.  That being said, I would highly recommend that this article be updated given that 2010 is the last bit of information we have about Miller and nothing really to indicate that he was a college bust.   Red Phoenix  let's talk... 01:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't think this person was notable to begin with. We should not consider news coverage for potential fame to be an indication of notability(In my opinion). Chillum 16:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't meet the notability criteria for football players or high school and college athletes.204.126.132.231 (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2014 (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.