Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Drone

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. The keep arguments aren't entirely convincing, but not enough support for deletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Drone

Non-notable football player. Never played a game in the NFL, and af2 doesn't pass for notability. Fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:BIO. Wizardman 18:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - af2 is professional and therefore should pass notability. If all D-I college players are notable, and not all D-I college players are able to make it to af2, then af2 should logically be notable.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 18:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not all D-I college players are notable though (that would be how many new articles every year? Thousands, scary thought). Sounds like an otherstuffexists argument to me. Wizardman 19:11, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not all d-1 players are notable, but just about all d-1 starting quarterbacks are. I'm not sure if this guy started or not though. RF23 (talk) 23:24, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment - I don't think all D-I FBS players are notable either, but in recent AFDs people have used WP:ATHLETE to say they are. We have to at least be consistent.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete Person is not People who have competed at the fully professional level of a sport, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis.[9] nor People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships. Arma virumque cano (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I want af2 to be notable, because I personally think it is but the community has said before that they are not notable.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 19:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - In recent AFDs, people have used WP:ATHLETE to say that D-I FBS players are notable because it's the top amateur level of the sport. If all D-I FBS players are notable, and not all D-I FBS players are capable of making it to af2, then af2 has to have an overall talent level higher than D-I FBS and therefore should be notable too if D-I FBS is. It's simply logical and there's no other way around it. If you argue per WP:ATHLETE that an D-I FBS player is notable but af2 players are not, you're essentially saying that less talented and accomplished players are notable than more talented and accomplished ones, which is illogical.

I'd also like to point out that because there is no AFL this year, many players who would be playing in the AFL are forced to play af2, so the talent level of af2 is surely as high as it has ever been.►Chris Nelson^Holla! 15:52, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I vote keep. To me he was a two year starter, all conference . . . not all D-I guys and not all area guys are notable. But, in this case if a guy is All-Gateway, even though it's not All-Big 12 I gotta think it meets wiki notable standards. Just my take on it. RussFrancisTE81 (talk) 15:59, 16 May 2009 (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.