Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawn Stiffler

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. ^King Jakob _C2 16:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Shawn Stiffler[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails to meet notability as per WP:BIO, WP:WPBB/N and WP:NCOLLATH. References are all primary sources. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:16, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. czar · · 07:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. czar · · 07:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Subject is a Division I college coach. These are notable, and indpendent sources exist. Billcasey905 (talk) 13:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree Division I Coach does not meet notability criteria. News coverage is clearly routine. See WP:NCOLLATH. Just because someone exists and has been mentioned in the press as part of routine coverage of a broader topic, in this case college sports, does not make them notable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The the section header, language of the three criteria, and edit history all indicate to me that WP:NCOLLATH is geared much more heavily towards players than coaches, so I'm hesitant to use it as anything more than a loose guideline for this discussion.

Keep per previous WikiProjects' consensus (WP:CFB, WP:CBBALL) that Division I head coaches for football, men's basketball and baseball (current or historical) are notable. Jrcla2 (talk) 17:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:53, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Jrcla2's point. In general, I don't think sources are a great measure of notability for baseball coach articles (whether a journalist has decided to feature the coach shouldn't determine notability), especially when the coach in question has taken on his position so recently. (That said, he received a not insignificant amount of coverage with Keyes's death.) A compromise I'd be willing to explore is to use NCAA berths (and the media coverage that comes with them) as a mark of notability for mid-major and low-major coaches– single bids for present-day coaches and multiple bids for historic coaches. Kithira (talk) 03:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 18:13, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Head coach on a permanent basis of a Division I team in a major sport. By all rational standards that';s notability. (If he headremainedinterim coach, I would have said delete). DGG ( talk ) 05:40, 15 June 2013 (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.