Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Griffin
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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Marcus Griffin[edit]
- Marcus Griffin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Hasn't played professionally, so doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE. Fences&Windows 02:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. —Fences&Windows 02:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. —Fences&Windows 02:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep: Plese note that WP:ATHLETE ia a standard for inclusion, not exclusion. A college football player is notable without ever playing professional football if he meets the general notability guideline. Griffin played every game, and was one of the defensive stars, for the University of Texas Longhorns -- a major football team. He's a sufficiently big star that Topps even issued a football card for him, see here. He has also been the subject of substantial, non-trivial coverage in the media. See for example: (1) Marcus Griffin makes name for himself at Texas: Marcus Griffin, as his twin brother did, is leading UT's defense, Dallas Morning News, Dec. 2007, (2) Texas safety carves out his own identity, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, October 25, 2007; (3) Griffin out of brother's shadow, San Antonio Express, Aug. 2007; (4) Griffin twins could make up half of UT's secondary, Austin American-Statesman, March 2006, (5) Twins left: UT happy Griffins are back: Griffin brothers expected to be primary safeties for Longhorns, Dallas Morning News, Aug. 2006, (6) 'Other' twin gets his shot at Texas, San Antonio Express-News, Aug. 2006, (7) Griffins Could Be Double Trouble, Austin American-Statesman (NewsBank), Mar 29, 2006, (8) A family tradition: Griffin, as his twin brother did, is leading Texas' defense, Kerrville Daily Times, Dec. 2007. Cbl62 (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The following are also feature stories about Griffin and available through NewsBank: (9) SPEAK SOFTLY, HIT 'EM HARD, San Antonio Express-News, December 26, 2007, (10) Another Griffin carrying Texas torch, Press-Register (Mobile, AL), December 23, 2007, (11) Senior safety Griffin's two picks help seal deal for Longhorns, Daily Texan, October 22, 2007, (12) The tortoise of Horns backs, Griffin scores on persistence, Austin American-Statesman, October 21, 2007. Cbl62 (talk) 15:41, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep plenty of notability here, even before any possible professional career may get underway. Sources abound, lots of coverage. Yes, they should be added to the article--but that's an editing issue, not a deletion issue.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep - The nominator is clearly acting in good faith, but I believe the nomination was made because of a misunderstanding in policy. WP:BIO says WP:ATHLETE is an additional criteria ("Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included"), meaning that it loosens notability criteria, not restricts it. The subject meets the more general WP:BIO basic criteria/WP:GNG as demonstrated by the sources listed by User:Cbl62. Strikehold (talk) 07:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- comment agreed. For further discussion, see WP:ABELINCOLN essay that covers the topic "Just because Abraham Lincoln doesn't pass WP:ATHLETE does not mean that article should be deleted."--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Griffin meets WP:GNG and WP:BIO per the sources listed by Cbl62.--Giants27 (c|s) 14:58, 24 July 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.