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.
NLIST states, "There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists..." This AfD reflects the present lack of consensus on this wider issue.
Jake Wartenberg (
talk)
20:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not seeing any coverage of this specific statistic beyond the list maintained by Baseball-Reference.com (
[1]), having searched the internet, Google Books, and Google Scholar. We appear to fall short of
WP:LISTN, and this title does not seem to make for an appropriate redirect to any more general article. signed, Rosguilltalk18:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete This title is so oddly specific that it took me a second to figure out what the list even was. This is not a notable topic for a list.
QuicoleJR (
talk)
19:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
To be fair, baseball is notorious for keeping extremely specific records. But that doesn't mean every possible statistic meets LISTN, and currently we've identified only a single source covering this statistic. signed, Rosguilltalk19:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, but can we just appreciate the specificity of the title. Like specifically center fielders with double plays is something to really keep track of. Only baseball-reference would have this stat too. I think I feel bad for the author(s) for this likely deletion.
Conyo14 (
talk)
04:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. Outfield assist leaders are notable, and double play leaders are notable; this seems a worthwhile combination of the two.
Newyorkbrad (
talk)
13:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Can anyone tell me why this article is up for deletion? And if someway to make sure that article don't deleted at all, tell me of how to fix the article ASAP so the deletion notice is taken off the article. SO please, ask me because I put alot of sweat and tears into this article and I pray that I know how to fix this problem as quickly as possible. Thank you and good day.
BaseballFanatic1 (
talk)
17:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
As I and the various editors who have !voted delete have noted, you need to provide sources that demonstrate that this topic meets
WP:LISTN. So, multiple reliable sources (both lists and prose coverage would be considered, although prose is definitely better) that enumerate or discuss this specific statistic. Currently only one has been identified, baseball-reference.com signed, Rosguilltalk17:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: This topic fails to have the necessary sources discussing this grouping, and as such
WP:LISTN is not met. While it is clear that the creator put a lot of work into this article, it is not suitable for wikipedia. I'd encourage them to
WP:TRYANOTHER.
Let'srun (
talk)
19:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The reasoning as to "why this article" was that it was a new article awaiting review, that had already been tagged for {{notability}} for over two months without improvement. The other articles would appear to be an example of
WP:FAITACCOMPLI/
WP:OSE. Moreover, given baseball's noted interest in arcane statistics, I think it's entirely plausible that a nontrivial amount of the above actually do meet
WP:LISTN, and need individual
WP:BEFOREs to be carried out prior to nomination rather than presupposing that they all have the same level of coverage. signed, Rosguilltalk13:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
possible Keep (TBD) per
WP:TRAINWRECK, we all know there are thousands and thousands of stat articles that possibly suffer from the same exact problem but people recognize their encyclopedic value. -
BeFriendlyGoodSir (
talk)
02:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
On a side note, it's not like the article is outdated... the creator of the article is actively updating it. Look forward to everyone's feedback. -
BeFriendlyGoodSir (
talk)
02:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This objection is silly, a trainwreck would be guaranteed to occur if and only if this were a mass-nomination. There is nothing stopping editors from discussing the relative merits of this list and coming to a clear consensus. signed, Rosguilltalk13:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep.. I'm not sure about the subject matter but considering how many articles of similar types that exist it doesnt make sense to delete this particular one. Though i couldnt really understand if this was for hitting into a double play (which isnt really fielding position specific) or turning double plays as a fielder... Probably needs some actual discussion on the project page about these pages.. maybe the title should be
List of Major League Baseball career double plays turned as a center fielder leadersSpanneraol (
talk)
02:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
These should be "List of Major League Baseball career leaders in double plays as a center fielder" maybe. Rgrds. --
BX (
talk)
04:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I couldn't agree more. "Career leaders in double plays as a [position]" is a far better phrasing of the subject. I would also be happy if the word "turned" was added to that as well to make it clear these are defensive DPs.
Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (
talk •
contributions)
02:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails
WP:LISTN due to lack of significant coverage as a group. The fact that this is the only list being “targeted” is irrelevant. Each individual article must stand or fall on its own merit. FrankAnchor00:27, 4 June 2024 (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.
The result was no consensus.
NLIST states, "There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists..." This AfD reflects the present lack of consensus on this wider issue.
Jake Wartenberg (
talk)
20:11, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not seeing any coverage of this specific statistic beyond the list maintained by Baseball-Reference.com (
[1]), having searched the internet, Google Books, and Google Scholar. We appear to fall short of
WP:LISTN, and this title does not seem to make for an appropriate redirect to any more general article. signed, Rosguilltalk18:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete This title is so oddly specific that it took me a second to figure out what the list even was. This is not a notable topic for a list.
QuicoleJR (
talk)
19:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
To be fair, baseball is notorious for keeping extremely specific records. But that doesn't mean every possible statistic meets LISTN, and currently we've identified only a single source covering this statistic. signed, Rosguilltalk19:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, but can we just appreciate the specificity of the title. Like specifically center fielders with double plays is something to really keep track of. Only baseball-reference would have this stat too. I think I feel bad for the author(s) for this likely deletion.
Conyo14 (
talk)
04:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. Outfield assist leaders are notable, and double play leaders are notable; this seems a worthwhile combination of the two.
Newyorkbrad (
talk)
13:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Can anyone tell me why this article is up for deletion? And if someway to make sure that article don't deleted at all, tell me of how to fix the article ASAP so the deletion notice is taken off the article. SO please, ask me because I put alot of sweat and tears into this article and I pray that I know how to fix this problem as quickly as possible. Thank you and good day.
BaseballFanatic1 (
talk)
17:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
As I and the various editors who have !voted delete have noted, you need to provide sources that demonstrate that this topic meets
WP:LISTN. So, multiple reliable sources (both lists and prose coverage would be considered, although prose is definitely better) that enumerate or discuss this specific statistic. Currently only one has been identified, baseball-reference.com signed, Rosguilltalk17:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: This topic fails to have the necessary sources discussing this grouping, and as such
WP:LISTN is not met. While it is clear that the creator put a lot of work into this article, it is not suitable for wikipedia. I'd encourage them to
WP:TRYANOTHER.
Let'srun (
talk)
19:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The reasoning as to "why this article" was that it was a new article awaiting review, that had already been tagged for {{notability}} for over two months without improvement. The other articles would appear to be an example of
WP:FAITACCOMPLI/
WP:OSE. Moreover, given baseball's noted interest in arcane statistics, I think it's entirely plausible that a nontrivial amount of the above actually do meet
WP:LISTN, and need individual
WP:BEFOREs to be carried out prior to nomination rather than presupposing that they all have the same level of coverage. signed, Rosguilltalk13:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
possible Keep (TBD) per
WP:TRAINWRECK, we all know there are thousands and thousands of stat articles that possibly suffer from the same exact problem but people recognize their encyclopedic value. -
BeFriendlyGoodSir (
talk)
02:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
On a side note, it's not like the article is outdated... the creator of the article is actively updating it. Look forward to everyone's feedback. -
BeFriendlyGoodSir (
talk)
02:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This objection is silly, a trainwreck would be guaranteed to occur if and only if this were a mass-nomination. There is nothing stopping editors from discussing the relative merits of this list and coming to a clear consensus. signed, Rosguilltalk13:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep.. I'm not sure about the subject matter but considering how many articles of similar types that exist it doesnt make sense to delete this particular one. Though i couldnt really understand if this was for hitting into a double play (which isnt really fielding position specific) or turning double plays as a fielder... Probably needs some actual discussion on the project page about these pages.. maybe the title should be
List of Major League Baseball career double plays turned as a center fielder leadersSpanneraol (
talk)
02:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
These should be "List of Major League Baseball career leaders in double plays as a center fielder" maybe. Rgrds. --
BX (
talk)
04:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I couldn't agree more. "Career leaders in double plays as a [position]" is a far better phrasing of the subject. I would also be happy if the word "turned" was added to that as well to make it clear these are defensive DPs.
Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (
talk •
contributions)
02:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails
WP:LISTN due to lack of significant coverage as a group. The fact that this is the only list being “targeted” is irrelevant. Each individual article must stand or fall on its own merit. FrankAnchor00:27, 4 June 2024 (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.