Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Devon Kennard


 * Comment Why on Earth would you list articles for deletion if "there appears to be significant coverage of them as individuals and significant independent awards at a collegiate level."? §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  07:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right, I'll remove those three.--- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 07:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I really don't think it is a wise idea to attempt a mass AfD for a large number of subjects, simply because they are athletes. Notability, established through multiple reliable sources, should not be ignored simply because several articles fall into the same general category. This is too broad of an AfD, in my opinion. - auburn pilot's   sock  07:31, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd also note that the wording and intent of WP:ATHLETE is currently being debated on the guideline's talk page. I do not think it is wise to mass AfD so many unrelated subjects on the basis of a disputed guideline. - auburn pilot's   sock  07:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Didn't know that... will work on creating individual AFD's for these players.--- Balloonman  PoppaBalloon 08:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Suggest withdraw and relist individually. §hep   •   ¡Talk to me!  07:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Suggest withdraw Agreed there. Nominating Clausen and Beanie Wells?? Good grief. I wish people nominating athletes for deletion (especially college football players) were actually familiar with who they are as well as the sport. Reading up at National Collegiate Athletic Association and Division I would be a fantastic start. Just another example of wasting the time of editors who could be working on articles, but instead have to keep dropping by to weigh in on these ridiculous nominations. --Geologik (talk) 08:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC)