Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Cox (American football)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Although the current sourcing of the article is a little weak Strikehold has shown that there are many unused articles and the general consensus seems to be that the article thus meets the GNG. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 08:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Cox (American football)[edit]

Joe Cox (American football) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:ATH and WP:NSPORT, never played or signed with a professional team. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you are referring to the top article here, that link redirects you to ABC News... Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:01, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep How many times do we have to do this: WP:ATH (i.e. playing professionally) is NOT an exclusionary criterion, and therefore failing to meet it is not a valid reason for deletion. After going through just the first six of 16 pages of results for "'Joe Cox' quarterback" in Google News I found: Atlanta Journal Constitution, WSBTV, New York Times, Scout, Athens Banner-Herald, ESPN, The Oklahoman, Athens Banner-Herald, Ledger-Enquirer, The Athens Exchange, Ledger-Enquirer, The Augusta Chronicle, Savannah Morning News, Charlotte Observer, The Seattle Times. There is no question whatsoever that the subject meets WP:GNG, as will almost every quarterback who has served as a starter for a major college football team. Strikehold (talk) 00:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment when I put together the essay WP:ABELINCOLN I didn't know that it would be more than a fun thing to reference every so often... turns out, we actually need it.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:10, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep He was a starting quarterback for a major college football program.--Yankees10 01:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There's no policy that says that every starting quarterback for a major college football program is inherently notable, and I don't see anything that qualifies as anything but routine news coverage of UGA football. He got a headlined paragraph in the NYT's college football roundup for a very exciting game against Colorado; some press in Oklahoma when the Bulldogs came out there to play OK state; stories from news media in Atlanta, Augusta, Athens, Savannah, etc. The only surprise may be the Seattle Times report directed to both of the Georgia fans in the Pacific Northwest. If an inclusionary policy gets made to say that starting QBs in the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 10, Big East, etc. should all be presumed notable, fine, but that day hasn't yet come. All in all, this is just another fan-created shrine, and Joe Cox is just another talented college athlete who hasn't yet made it to the pro level. Mandsford 02:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • No one said policy states every starting QB is notable; but as a matter of course, most from a major program will meet WP:GNG because they are the focus of constant media attention. Where in WP:GNG does it say localized or regional news sources do not count toward notability (which your mention of Georgia cities seems to imply)? The AJC has a daily circulation of about a quarter of a million people and is the de facto newspaper of record in the US's 9th largest city. Moreover, Atlanta, Augusta, Savannah, and Athens are geographically dispersed cities throughout the state of Georgia (population 10 million), so to consider it "local" would stretch that word to meaninglessness. The Seattle news item was from the AP wire service, not for "Georgia fans" in Washington state—but for a national audience. Your last line sounds vaguely like WP:IDONTLIKEIT to me. The article is certainly not GA quality but it is neutrally written, hardly a "shrine". Strikehold (talk) 06:16, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep- The GNG is more than met. Not meeting WP:ATHLETE is not a reason for deletion in this case. Umbralcorax (talk) 03:24, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Parade high school All-American--thus passes the requirement of substantial coverage of high school career. Blueboy96 03:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Change to weak delete per Mosmof and my own search, which also revealed little beyond local coverage here in Charlotte. Blueboy96 20:51, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While just being named a "high school all-American" would not, in my opinion, warrant a stand-alone article, it is an indicator of one of several items such as those posted by Strikehold that can come together to support the aforementioned general notability guideline. One other point, the mentioned "Notablity (sports)" guideline clearly states that players can achieve notability through college sports.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:07, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Failing WP:ATH or WP:NSPORT is nit a valid rationale for deletion. Those guidelines indicate certain athletes are inherently notable, it does not judge the notability of other athletes. In that case, general notability guidelines apply, and based on the sources shown by Strikehold, this subject meets those guidelines. Edward321 (talk) 23:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete: Failing WP:ATH is not a valid rationale for deletion, but not meeting WP:GNG is, and I don't see any evidence in the article that it does. There are five sources cited in the article. Of the 5, one is a player stat page, another is a dead link at the UGA athletic department website, one is a blog dedicated to UGA football, another is an ESPN.com game report, and the last is a Rivals.com player profile. Which is to say, none of the above constitutes in-depth coverage by an independent, third party source. A quick Google search didn't get me anything beyond local coverage in Athens and Atlanta papers. Mosmof (talk) 00:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What? Please, see my post above. A cursory Google News Archive search shows a huge amount of significant press coverage, a small sample of which I posted in my !vote. The article only needs to make the assertion of notability, which it does. Strikehold (talk) 00:38, 12 October 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joe_Cox_(American_football)&oldid=1140395494"