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.
Keep. WP:NCOLLATH is an inclusionary standard not an exclusionary one. College athletes who receive significant coverage in multiple reliable sources can also qualify under the over-arching
WP:GNG standard. Here, Jackson has received such significant coverage in a number of major metropolitan newspapers (in addition to smaller outlets). Examples include
this from The Palm Beach Post and
this from the Miami Herald and
this from the Sun-Sentinel. Enough to pass GNG already, and this guy is just getting started and expected to be a superstar.
Cbl62 (
talk)
19:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
First source is a blog post, which is not reliable. Second counts, third is just a passing mention regarding the contributions of freshman players. Per
WP:crystal we can't keep the article just because he is expected to be good. And WP:NCOLLATH states when a college athlete is notable... I'm not sure what you mean.
‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ19:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Blogs are not all unreliable. Depends on the blog. A blog from a major metropolitan daily, featuring the work of one of its professional staff writers, is reliable. See
WP:NEWSBLOG. In any event, WikiOriginal-9 has now found abundant further examples of significant coverage.
Cbl62 (
talk)
21:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Most of those are either routine coverage or articles that mention his name but are on a broader or completely different topic. Comparing another player to him or discussing the recruiting class is routine. It's all routine. I don't believe that every college athlete warrants an article.
‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ21:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
@
El cid, el campeador: Feature articles about college athletes are not routine. Your last comment is a red herring. Nobody is saying that every college athlete warrants an article. Only the exceptional ones like Jackson (< 0.1% of college athletes) who generate significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources.
Cbl62 (
talk)
03:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Have you seen the coverage of college football (and basketball) in their respective cities and states? It's extensive. But, alas, I am alone here. Keep your article, I don't want it.
‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ03:19, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Keep. WP:NCOLLATH is an inclusionary standard not an exclusionary one. College athletes who receive significant coverage in multiple reliable sources can also qualify under the over-arching
WP:GNG standard. Here, Jackson has received such significant coverage in a number of major metropolitan newspapers (in addition to smaller outlets). Examples include
this from The Palm Beach Post and
this from the Miami Herald and
this from the Sun-Sentinel. Enough to pass GNG already, and this guy is just getting started and expected to be a superstar.
Cbl62 (
talk)
19:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
First source is a blog post, which is not reliable. Second counts, third is just a passing mention regarding the contributions of freshman players. Per
WP:crystal we can't keep the article just because he is expected to be good. And WP:NCOLLATH states when a college athlete is notable... I'm not sure what you mean.
‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ19:48, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Blogs are not all unreliable. Depends on the blog. A blog from a major metropolitan daily, featuring the work of one of its professional staff writers, is reliable. See
WP:NEWSBLOG. In any event, WikiOriginal-9 has now found abundant further examples of significant coverage.
Cbl62 (
talk)
21:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Most of those are either routine coverage or articles that mention his name but are on a broader or completely different topic. Comparing another player to him or discussing the recruiting class is routine. It's all routine. I don't believe that every college athlete warrants an article.
‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ21:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)reply
@
El cid, el campeador: Feature articles about college athletes are not routine. Your last comment is a red herring. Nobody is saying that every college athlete warrants an article. Only the exceptional ones like Jackson (< 0.1% of college athletes) who generate significant coverage in multiple, reliable sources.
Cbl62 (
talk)
03:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Have you seen the coverage of college football (and basketball) in their respective cities and states? It's extensive. But, alas, I am alone here. Keep your article, I don't want it.
‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ03:19, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
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.