Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Porcello


 * 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, several of the keep argruements were invalid, minor league players got deleted via AFD many times before, but the high school award he got gives notablity, making several of the delete ones invalid as well, lets wait and see if this kid makes the majors in a couple of years, if not this article can always be re-AFD. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 20:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Rick Porcello

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable baseball player. Was just drafted in the first round of the Major League Baseball draft, but was drafted straight out of high school, and hasn't signed a contract. He might not choose to go pro, and even if he does, he's got a long way to go to meet WP:BIO. --fuzzy510 20:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC) fuzzy510 20:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Keep: All baseball players (and other athletes) are getting their own pages. Whether he plays in the MLB or not, he was drafted by a Major League team and is technically in their organization. Since he's on the team, he shouldn't have his article deleted. -- Ksy92003  (talk)  20:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: That's actually not how the MLB draft works at all.  If a player chooses to go to college, he can later be drafted by another team.  If he goes to Carolina, the draft is the extent of his association with the team.  --fuzzy510 20:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I didn't mean in the organization in the sense that he could be called-up tomorrow or anything like that. But he was drafted by an MLB team, nonetheless.  Whether he wants to play for the team that drafted him or not, until he announces that he is gonna go back to college or play for the team, you have to use the assumption that he will play for the team.  He was drafted by a team, but could and might go back to play college baseball.  "Could" and "might" implies that it is speculation.  Since he "could" play college ball, that's speculation and I don't think that can (or should) be used as the rationale for deleting an article.  -- Ksy92003   (talk)  20:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep There's some sources for him and he was named 2006-07 Gatorade national baseball player of the year. That in itself is "notable" if that's what you want to go by. If there are sources for the player, this article should be kept.++ aviper2k7 ++ 20:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, article is sourced, and the Gatorade connection is another bit of (somewhat marginal) notability. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 20:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I also have that same opinion, and think that ALL the articles you've nominated for deletion should be kept. -- Ksy92003   (talk)  21:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete Players who are drafted are not notable enough for inclusion here. The athlete must have something notable about them besides being drafted as drafted does not guarantee much of anything. Granted, the gatorade thing is mentioned, but I don't see a significant amount of importance placed on that in the world of baseball.  If they are a first overall draft pick or perhaps USA Today Player of the Year, then they are notable.  I don't think it would benefit wikipedia to have articles on ever person ever to be paid to play baseball. //Tecmobowl 21:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * What's not notable about a player winning a National award? Well, there are articles for professional players.  He's on his way to being a professional baseball player.  Look, a couple days ago was the 2007 NHL Entry Draft.  Most of those players who were drafted that didn't have articles then have articles now because they were drafted.


 * Yeah, I guess I agree with you, Tecmobowl. Let's delete every single article on an athlete because they didn't win World Series MVP or a Super Bowl.  And if they didn't win a Conn Smythe Trophy, let's delete their article, as well.  -- Ksy92003   (talk)  22:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Hasn't played pro baseball yet, so clearly fails WP:BIO. If he got a contract and played in the minor league, that would technically satisfy the "played professionally" provision of WP:BIO but per recent AFD comments, some feel that the minors don't count, or certain levels of minor league don't count. If so those editors should edit WP:BIO to say so. I think we would then need to equate what it means in salary and notability to play various pro sports in various countries.Allison Stokke had lots of press coverage of her high school athleticism (before her notability for other reasons) and the article was deleted largely because editors judged high school athletes non-notable. Edison 03:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 05:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 05:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Porcello is not only a first-round draft pick, he has received independent, non-trivial coverage in national newspapers as winner of the Gatorade national baseball player of the year, which is awarded to one -- and only one -- player per year, joining such notables as Drew Henson, Alex Rodriguez and Gary Sheffield, as well as being selected for a national all-star team. Per WP:BIO, notability is established when the person has been the subject of published1 secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject and if the person has received significant recognized awards or honors, both of which are established in the article. Not all players drafted deserve articles. Notability has been clearly established for Porcello. Alansohn 17:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep this one (as opposed to the other HS draftees). Porcello has received more independent non-trivial press coverage for his various accomplishments than the others. I would argue that top-10 picks are notable, and Porcello, by most accounts, would have been one except for a "subplot" (draft slot and Scott Boras) that increases his notability and the amount of coverage about him. Slic e NYC (Talk) 00:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'd disagree that "first round" or "Top 10" or "Top X" draft picks should be assumed notable. If all the guy is is a draft pick out of high school who hasn't played yet, then no notability should be assumed.  It should come down to providing references to non-trivial secondary source coverage on him.  In this case, though, those secondary source references are present and have been provided, so this subject clears the bar.  Mwelch 03:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This is exactly what it should come down to. No guideline can cover up the fact this article has the sources to be kept.++ aviper2k7 ++ 03:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete: Most baseball players who are drafted never even make it to the big leagues, talk about an article when and if he did, otherwise start your own baseball wiki. IvoShandor 22:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - How does that even matter if there are enough valid sources to write an article on the person.++ aviper2k7 ++ 03:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * STRONG KEEP, he is notable. Plenty of secondary sources.. How many persons get drafted at his age? Some of you guys have your standards way to high.  If a major team is willing to bet millions on a kid and sport writers across the country write about him.  What makes us armchair editors think he isn't notable.. Do a little reasearch before you decide someone is not notable.  Callelinea 15:27, 29 June 2007 (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.