Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Africa's Top Backstrokers


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 14:54, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

South Africa's Top Backstrokers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A lot of WP:ORIGINALSYN used here, no independent third party sources. Also fails WP:GNG JMHamo (talk) 14:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Non-notable swimming topic. Subject does not satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG, because the subject lacks significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources.  As noted above, this article also suffers from original research issues per WP:OR and WP:SYNTH.  Moreover, the article relies 100% on online raw statistical listings of FINA (the international swimming federation) and South Africa Swimming (the SA national swimming federation) -- neither of which provides any analysis of such stats -- neither of which is independent of the article subject.  When establishing the notability of sports topics, we do not accept sources such MLB.com for baseball players, or NFL.com for American football players, because they are not independent of the subject players.  This situation is no different.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - Sorry, I am a new Wikipedia user. This is my first article. I have addressed your issues. Regarding WP:ORIGINALSYN, I have divided the article body into 2 parts. The data for the first part is from the official FINA website. FINA is the international governing body of swimming, diving, water polo, synchronized swimming and open water swimming. The data for the second part is from the SwimSA website. The first reference is a link to the FINA website, the official "Swimming World Rankings". The second reference is a link to the Swimming South Africa rankings page. The third reference is the link to the official tool that FINA has developed to allow comparisons of results among different events. It does so by converting swimming times into points, which can then be compared in order to identify the top swimmer. I have attached an image to the page to illustrate how this is done. First I refer you to the FINA Swimming World Rankings page(reference 1). On this page, set 'Time Type' to 'individual', 'Federation' to 'South Africa', 'Continent' to 'All', 'Event' to 'Specific Individual Event -> '50 BK SC', 'Gender' to 'Male', 'Date' to 'Date Range: 01/05/2012 to 30/04/2013'. Leave the rest unchanged and click on 'SEARCH'. This returns a list of the top 50m Backstroke Male SC swimmers in South Africa. As you can see, this list is the same as the list at the top left of the image that is attached to the Wikipedia page. The swimmers' names and times correspond. Now go to the link on the Wikipedia page under reference 3. This opens a page called 'FINA Points Table'. On this page you can download the 'FINA Points Calculator'. Download this tool and open it using WinRar. With the Fina Points Calculator running, choose 'FINA Point Scoring 2012', '50 Backstroke', '25m Pool', Men, and enter the first time on the list ie. 24.25. Now click on 'Calculate'. This returns a points value. This points value corresponds to the points value on the Excel spreadsheet in the image. They are the same. I have created a red square around them to indicate that they correspond. This same procedure is followed for each of the 6 backstroke events, for every season. I refer you to the image on the Wikipedia page for the rest of the explanation. For each of the 6 backstroke events (per season), the swimmer, the time, and the points are listed. The Swimmer, Time, and Points values for each event are then listed under a single sorted list called 'SC Rankings(sorted by points)'. This list contains duplicates. To the right of this list is another list. This list is called 'SC Rankings (with duplicates removed)' and contains no duplicates. Because the data in this list is sorted, the 3 swimmers at the top of this list are the top 3 SC backstrokers. The names of the Top 3 SC swimmers (ie. Darren Murray, Gerhard Zandberg, and Garth Tune) are then used to create a new list called 'Top 3 SC Backstrokers'. The person at the TOP of this list (ie. number 1) is the Top SC Backstroker. In this case it is Darren Murray. The same process is followed to find the Top LC Backstroker. The Top LC Backstroker in this case is Gerhard Zandberg. In order to find the TOP backstroker overall, we take the 'SC Rankings (sorted by points)' and the 'LC Rankings (sorted by points)' lists and combine them to form a new list, 'Backstroke Rankings (sorted by points)'. We sort this list on points from largest to smallest. Now we remove the duplicates from the list at the bottom left corner of the image to form a new list called 'Backstroke Rankings (duplicates removed)'. The 3 backstrokers at the top of this list(Gerhard Zandberg, Ricky Ellis, and Charl Crous) are used to form a new list called 'Top 3 Backstrokers'. The person at the top of this list is the Top Backstroker overall. In this case it is Gerhard Zandberg. This represents the algorithm for finding the data for the season of 01 May 2012 to 30 April 2013. In order to find the data for all the seasons that are displayed on the Wikipedia page, we apply the same algorith that I just described to you to every season. For the first part of the article we applied the algorithm to the data from the FINA database (ie. the source referred to by reference 1). For the second part of the article we applied the algorithm to the data from the SwimSA database (ie. the source referred to by reference 2). Thus, the data is not original but it is instead based on the data in the FINA database and the SwimSA database. The data has merely been converted to a points value using an official tool called the 'FINA Points Calculator'. This tool was specifically designed for this purpose. You are welcome to verify the information, but I can assure you that the information on the Wikipedia page is 100% accurate. The reason that I created this page is because I noticed that people had difficulty figuring out how to find the top backstrokers because most people do not have specialized Excel knowledge. This page makes it possible for people without Excel knowledge to know who the top backstrokers in South Africa are, otherwise they would not know. I feel that this page should not be deleted because it helps the average backstroker who does not have Excel knowledge to know who the top backstrokers in South Africa are. Another thing that I would like to point out is that FINA is the ONLY national swimming organization (in the world) that Swimming South Africa submits data to. Not only that, but Swimming South Africa is the ONLY national swimming organization in South Africa. All provincial federations submit data to SwimSA. I have spoken to a few Swimming South Africa employees and the data has been verified at provincial level and at national level. The data used is thus very reliable and accurate. Also, FINA does have significant coverage as it is the main world wide swimming organization. I have only used these two sources because the provincial federations submit data to SwimSA and SwimSA submits data to FINA. Any other sources would be biased and reduce the accuracy of the data. Currently, the information on this Wikipedia page is 100% accurate and can be verified. I would also like to point out that I do have a BComm Degree in Economics, Econometrics, and Logistics Management (4 years) and a BSc Degree in Computer Science, Information Systems, Logic, and Artificial Intelligence (4 years). The SwimSA data is accurate, the FINA data is accurate, and my Excel work is also 100% accurate. Everything on the Wikipedia page 'South Africa's Top Backstrokers' is accurate. Definitely. If there are any other problems with the article please just let me know then I will try to correct them. Thank you, kind regards. Blueblood53 (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Blueblood, I know you're new to Wikipedia. No one is questioning the accuracy/truthfulness of the article's facts, but that's not the problem here.  On Wikipedia, there are other factors that determine the suitability of a topic for inclusion as a stand-alone Wikipedia article.  I suggest that you review the applicable guidelines at WP:GNG, WP:NLIST, WP:LISTPURP and WP:NOTSTATS.  Thanks.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:05, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - The question isn't whether or not the information is accurate, but whether if the page meets Wikipedia's standard for it to have its own page. I would say no. While it's obvious Blueblood has put in a lot of work in the respective page, I would say the page is nothing more than WP:IINFO. Philipmj24 (talk) 17:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - I am going to be without a PC tomorrow but i will address these issues tomorrow evening or the day after. Kind regards. 197.87.109.162 (talk) 23:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

We have reached a consensus that the information in the article is accurate, but notability guidelines do not apply to content within an article. I refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GNG. 1.	"Significant coverage": This topic has received significant coverage in the past. Please watch the video at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn4j7dmziOQ. This is a Top Billing episode. Top Billing is a television program that is broadcasted by SABC (South African Broadcasting Corporation). SABC broadcasts 4 channels to the ENTIRE South African population (for free), as opposed to DSTV (Digital Satellite Television) which has multiple channels that are available ONLY on subscription. This topic was clearly mentioned on Top Billing. The person in the Top Billing interview is clearly identified by Top Billing as “South Africa’s Top Backstroke Swimmer” to the entire South African population (53 million people). The viewers of this program (Top Billing) currently have no way of verifying the accuracy of this country wide broadcast so it is necessary to have it on Wikipedia so that people (sponsors et al) can verify the information. 2.	"Reliable": The sources that are referenced DO have editorial integrity that allow verifiable evaluation of notability. Reference 1: The source (SwimSA) is the ONLY official swimming federation in South Africa and all provincial federations submit their results to SwimSA. A SwimSA employee has told me that the information is 100% accurate and that the times have been verified by “The Provincial Officials Society, the Board, and by Swimming South Africa”. Reference 2: The source (FINA) describes itself as “FINA is the international governing body of swimming, diving, water polo, synchronized swimming and open water swimming.” They are the world’s major swimming organization and their published results would also be accurate. Reference 3: The source (The FINA Points Calculator) is based on the FINA Points Table. The application is available for download directly from the FINA website and is used by millions of swimmers worldwide. Thus ALL the sources referenced are reliable. 3.	"Sources": The sources listed under references are primary sources ie. Raw data BUT there is a screenshot to illustrate how the information was calculated. The secondary source is thus the excel information that I have calculated. The Wikipedia notability guidelines state that the sources do NOT have to be available online. The information is verifiable because I have attached two screenshots to the article which serve as examples that can be used by viewers to easily verify the information if they want to. We have already reached consensus during this discussion that the information is indeed reliable. 4.	"Independent of the subject": This work is considered independent because none of us are affiliated to the article’s subject. The work does not fall under advertising, press releases, autobiographies, or the subject’s website. 5.	"Presumed": This means that an assumption was created that the article should be included as it provides a way to verify the claims made in the Top Billing episode. The Wikipedia article is based on reliable, published sources, and is expressed from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means that it is representing fairly, proportionately, and without bias. It is without bias because the calculations are mathematically verifiable and always yield the same unbiased result. The article does not violate the “what Wikipedia is not”, in particular the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This is explained in more depth below (which addresses WP:IINFO). For the above reasons the topic DOES meet the general notability guideline ie. WP:GNG. The topic thus warrants its own article. I refer you to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information. The data does provide encyclopedic value because the data has been put in the context of verifiable calculations which has been based on the data referenced to independent sources. The article is not: 1.	A Summary-only description of works. The data is expanded into a form that allows swimming times to be compared across events by means of FINA points. The FINA points are then compared to reach an accurate ranking of the Top backstrokers per event. 2.	A lyrics database as it contains no reference to or information about songs. 3.	An excessive listing of statistics. Most of the statistical calculations (in Excel) are not visible to the reader. The reader only sees the end result of the calculations. Some of the statistical calculations are visible as attached images (2 images) because this allows the reader to understand the article. The article does not contain long and sprawling lists of statistics. The displayed information is not confusing to readers and is readable. The visible statistics are put into context for a general reader by the initial paragraph. It is necessary to display the data in the current form because it would be less understandable and more complicated to readers if displayed in paragraph form. All the excess statistics (Excel calculations) have already been omitted and the necessary data is summarized concisely. 4.	An Exhaustive log of software updates. The article does not deal with software updates. For the above reasons, this article satisfies the requirement that “Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information” ie. It satisfies WP:IINFO. I refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NLIST. The people in the list (individual items) contained within the article follow the Wikipedia content policy of Verifiability (the people are listed on the SwimSA and FINA websites that are used as references), No original research (the data used is based on the SwimSA and FINA databases. The times represent actual performances as measured by the swimming equipment.), Neutral point of view (The data is calculated in an objective and mathematical manner. The points are from the FINA points table. The sorting is done in Excel. The information is thus objective, neutral, and one will always end up with the same result.), plus the other content policies as well. Each item on the list is well referenced and the list as a whole represents a neutral point of view. The items (people) meet the requirements of Wikipedia’s Verifiability policy because people reading or editing the list can check the references to see that the information comes from a reliable source. All items (people) are relevant to the topic and are represented by a good source. The list involves living persons. It complies with the Biographies of living persons policy. I refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LISTPURP. The list in the article is for Information purposes. It represents an information source. It is a structured list and is organized chronologically by season. I refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOTSTATS. This has already been described above for WP:IINFO. Thank you for your kindness and cooperation. Blueblood53 (talk) 19:44, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Hey there! I understand your concerns and am now going to address them.


 * Comment - JMHamo, Dirtlawyer1, and Philipmj24. I have addressed your concerns. If there is anything else that I need to do to the article in order for it to be kept then please let me know soon so that I can do the improvements because the 7 days is almost over. If you don't then I will assume that you guys don't have any further concerns and that we have reached a consensus to keep the article. Thank you, kind regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueblood53 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment That is not your decision. An uninvolved Admin will review this and make a decision soon. JMHamo (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * My concerns, as stated above, remain: this topic is Not Notable under the general notable guidelines per WP:GNG for lack of significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment Yes, I know it's not my decision. I was implying that you guys must let me know if there are any other improvements that I must make in order for the article to be kept. Thanks. Blueblood53 (talk) 23:29, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

I have already referred you to the Top Billing episode. That was a nationwide broadcast, yet there is no evidence to support their claim that the featured backstroker has ever been the top backstroker because he has ranked at number 2 at best. Here is another article: http://www.zwemza.com/?p=11846. This is from ZwemZA, an Independent Swim News Site (it says this at the top of their website). It says that “by the time he was 20 he was ranked as the world’s top 50m backstroker”, thus implying he was South Africa’s top backstroker too. These claims are accurate. swimswam.com describe themselves as “Swim news, swimming videos, college swimming and Olympic swimming coverage, everything for the swimmer and the swim fan.” In this article, Charl Crous is referred to as South Africa’s top backstroker http://swimswam.com/spains-costa-schmid-swims-personal-best-at-mare-nostrum/. This is inaccurate. Another article in The Times: http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2014/04/10/schoeman-halts-le-clos-victory-charge. They claim that Le Clos is the top backstroker in South Africa, but this is not the case because there are 6 backstroke events and the Top backstroker is found by comparing the best times across events by means of FINA points. Kind Regards. Blueblood53 (talk) 12:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Comment DirtLawyer1, here is an article from Business Day. http://www.bdlive.co.za/sport/othersport/2014/04/10/schoeman-shakes-off-challenge-by-le-clos. This is one of the biggest newspapers in the country. They refer to Chad le Clos as South Africa’s fastest backstroker, yet there is no evidence to support this as Chad doesn’t appear at the top of the rankings.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 00:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete –, the problem here is that this topic didn't exist until you defined it. Here at Wikipedia, we don't publish the results of our own research. Everything that we write is supposed to be based on what someone else has already written about. So when you say "This list was created ...", that's already an indication that this is your research, something that nobody has written about before. The effort is appreciated, but I think it would be better to start out by finding (not creating!) and adding information to existing topics. For example, our article on Charl Crous is pretty short. If you can find more information about him, like his biography, where he trains, etc. that would be very welcome. – Margin1522 (talk) 10:18, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Own research. Smartskaft (talk) 08:39, 27 March 2015 (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.