Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fort Myers Miracles players

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2008 August 5.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 This was a very tough AfD to close. The dispute seems to be on a rather base level about what our policy really constitutes as notable. Certainly I would encourage a discussion to evolve on what constitutes notability for minor leaguers. However, as the guidelines stand now, are they notable? That's the question presented, and the consensus seems to lean slightly. Jose Mijares I'm closing as keep since he's on the 40 man roster and several people pointed him out. After reading each comment, the consensus for the others that shows is one to delete. I can try and explain the close durther if needed, but it seems like everything that could be said has been said. Wizardman 05:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fort Myers Miracles players[edit]

Delete all. Here we are again with someone mass-creating articles for low-level minor league players. From a quick check, most of these players were low-round draft picks and most have yet to reach beyond the advanced A-level of the Minnesota Twins organization, the Fort Myers Miracle. Per countless other discussions, none of these players meet the notability guidelines that are usually agreed to when discussing baseball biographies. See WP:WPBB#Players. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A couple possible exceptions: Jose Mijares was created by a different author and has been to AAA, but was since demoted and is back in advanced A. Will Inman was created by a different author and has been to the AA-level in two non-Twins organizations. Kyle Waldrop and Matthew Fox (baseball) were both first-round draft picks and Waldrop, Oswaldo Sosa and Brian Dinkelman have all been to AA. If anyone finds anyone else that deserves special mention, make it clear here and we can either make sure they are clearly denoted or even removed from this AFD altogether. I was worried about an angry mob if I tried to do all of these AFDs separately when they are so closely related. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Deolis Guerra played in the All-Star Futures Game. Spanneraol (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Chris Parmelee was also a first round pick and a member of the USA Today All-USA high school baseball team.--E tac (talk) 04:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eli Tintor - someone beat me to that one. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Each individual player needs to be considered separately. Brandon Roberts for example meets the criteria in Wikiproject:Baseball of having been in a minor league all-star game. Nobody could possibly just give a blanket Keep or Delete on all these players. Kinston eagle (talk) 21:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, propose how you want it broken up then, please. If I break this up into 33 AFDs, my talk page will be burned down for sure. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that you do each one individually. I believe I've already said that. What you have at the moment is something unworkable - a number of players who are arguably notable (according to my post and the posts of others) and a number of players who are arguably not notable. Kinston eagle (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a place for people who start 33 nearly-identical AFDs simultaneously. It's called WP:ANI and I'm sure someone would make me explain it there if they had to cast 33 identical votes on 33 different pages. I fired up WP:AWB just to tag them all! Just do like Shapiros10 below and list out which ones you'd vote to delete and which you'd vote to keep. If folks agree with your division then I can cancel this and start up more than one batch - like one for folks who played in some A-level All-Star game and one for those that didn't. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all except for Jose Mijares Jose Mijares is on the 40-man roster for the Twins, and therefore notable. Shapiros10 ^{contact me}_{My work} 22:14, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all It is clear from the article about the Fort Myers Miracle that all 33 of these pages are about players on a single-A minor league baseball team that plays in the Florida State League. The proposal to consider each article separately only encourages people who want to the Johnny Spasms of the world who [mass produce articles] to see if it can be done. I don't even consider Jose Mijares to be notable until he appears in a major league game. Mandsford (talk) 00:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep to all. Since they are all being lumped together, they collectively all fall under WP:BIO's criteria for athletes found HERE. By the nominators admission every one of these players plays or has played for the Fort Myers Miracle, a fully professional baseball team. The first criteria for an athletes notability is that they are "Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league". Do any of the people who are voting to delete doubt that each of these players is being payed to play baseball? Many have been given 5-7 figure signing bonuses to play when they signed. How can it be argued that they are not professional? Several players have it mentioned in their bios that they participated in the College World Series. The second prong of criteria for notability for an athlete is "Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports". The College World Series is the highest level of amateur baseball in the United States and the second highest in the world behind the Olympics. Many of the players have participated in minor league all-star games at various levels. One of the criteria for notability under Wikiproject:Baseball for players (found HERE) is that they have "been selected for any minor league baseball All-star game in the affiliated minor leagues". Many also meet another criteria: "notable Minor League Baseball award" by achieving Player/Pitcher of the Week/Month/Year honors. The only reason the people voting to delete are giving for deletion is that these individuals play for a low level minor league team. The affiliated minor leagues are all professional regardless of whether they are rookie level or triple A. They are payed to play baseball. Kinston eagle (talk) 01:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I disagree with the blanket minor league All-Star Game clause at WP:WPBB#Players and am curious where the discussion is located that led to its inclusion. Distinction should be made for A- vs. AAA-level All-Star Games. Surely countless people have played in A-level All-Star Games and never made the majors. Another note: there is nothing in the WP:WPBB#Players essay that mentions College World Series. Regardless, I would encourage Kinston Eagle to determine which of these players meet his All-Star Game or College World Series criteria as I'm not convinced he's even voting to keep the articles that don't fit those. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessary to determine which of players meet the All-Star Game or College World Series criteria since by your own admission they all play professional baseball. Professional athletes are notable by WP:BIO standards. It is also WP:BIO that states that "Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports" are notable which is why you did not find it at WP:WPBB#Players. Obviously, they are not going to list every single amateur athletic event that is considered "highest level". I contend that the College World Series is the highest level of amateur baseball in this country. Do you consider some other competition to be higher for amateurs? Kinston eagle (talk) 02:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would the Olympics be a higher amateur competition? In track and field, for example, just running in the national collegiate championships wouldn't be considered notable, but being in the Olympics would be. Just curious if you believe that standard would apply to baseball, too. It'll be interesting in a few years after baseball isn't a sport at the Olympics anymore... Metros (talk) 02:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) I think we all know that those two little lines at WP:ATHLETE are ridiculously contentious and are almost never applied to baseball players. Hence why WP:WPBB#Players was assembled. Hell, WP:BIO in general has been changing rapidly since I came on the scene almost three years ago. It's nearly useless and is perpetually overridden. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:22, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So your reasoning for deletion isn't that they violate a particular wiki policy on notability, but that they don't agree with your own personal idea of what's notable or not? Your own opinion trumps criteria arrived at by thousands of people over several years? Your last post seems to imply that you agree with my interpretation of WP:BIO, but you think WP:BIO is shit. If that's the case, go to WP:BIO and try to sway the community to your line of thinking, but don't take out your disagreements on policy on articles that clearly conform to the established criteria. Kinston eagle (talk) 02:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What policy? WP:ATHLETE is a guideline. As such, it has been overridden by something more appropriate to baseball at WP:WPBB#Players. This has been done to death. Baseball-Reference bullpen is a great place to collect all of the folks who have never gotten higher than AA-level, but we have a notability standard here that has been upheld numerous times. Major leaguers only unless there is a high likelihood of future major league experience (like #1 draft picks and AAA All-Stars). —Wknight94 (talk) 02:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Moses for a related player bio which I thought distinct enough to nominate separately. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. I totally agree with the bundled nomination. Whilst these players may all be different, they are not of a level of sufficient notability in most cases, and in the others, they are pretty borderline, making a batched deletion of this chaff very appropriate, and unlikely to result in any real train wreck. Using Minor League Baseball as a reference is clearly insufficient and would tautologically seal the articles' fate. If anyone wants to name exceptions to this deletion, then let them speak now or forever hold thy peace. Ohconfucius (talk) 05:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creator's Opinion[edit]

I get the impression that people out there think I'm just some over zealous fan. Deolis Guerra was considered enough of a prospect by the Twins that they sought him from the Mets in the Johan Santana deal. That's not notable? Yet he is on your list.

This particular Miracle team captured its division title in the first half of the 2008 season, and set a franchise record in the process. Considering that the Minnesota Twins are respected universally for having one of the best-- if not, the best-- farm systems in baseball, the team that accomplished this feat is notable. Certainly, at very least, the all stars, first round picks and starting rotation deserve to have their entries kept.

I've read entries on other minor leaguers that were one sentence long. I did every one of the Miracle players more respect than that. I'm not saying that I did a perfect job, but I think that there are other articles out there that deserve to be on Wikipedia less.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 12:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per kingston eagle. These appear to all be professional athletes who meet WP:BIO guidelines. Nothing stated has refuted that. If you all can show that they are not professional athletes, I will be glad to revert to delete. JosephineBrooks (talk) 12:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note that this is the first edit by this user in over a year and less than 30th overall. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I may not agree with Ms. Brooks, but I'll be the first to say that her argument is relevant, and that it makes no difference whether she's an infrequent editor. Mandsford (talk) 15:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nobody is disputing that they're professional athletes, although it's at the second lowest possible level of competition in the United States (Class "A" minor league, which is higher than a "rookie league"). One could read WP:BIO for athletes as meaning that one becomes inherently notable as soon as one cashes a paycheck written by a professional league of some sort. The "loophole" (ambiguous term) is that there is not a definition of "fully professional league". Some would say that it means a "major" league that is at the highest level of competition in the nation where it operates; others would say that it means anything that's not semi-pro or entirely amateur. That leaves it to a debate by the editors. If it's open to all athletes who have ever had a "play for pay" experience, then I can only say that that's a broader definition than what's accorded to elected officials. Mandsford (talk) 13:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all I started to go through it all one person at a time to see who was notable and who wasn't but of the first four names on the list, three of them had played in minor league all-star games, which is a criteria under WP:BASEBALL. Wknight94 says he disagrees with some of those guidelines and then cites others. Much debate and compromise went into those guidelines as I recall and the intention was to include the notable minor leaguers who had appeared in Minor League All-Star games. Some of the people on this list are definitely not notable and those should be listed separately. If listed as a group, they must all be kept. Spanneraol (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They must nothing. An admin is not obligated to delete them all or keep them all just because they're in one AFD. To your other point, as I said above, I'd like to see the debate you're referring to. It's unlikely that I agreed to the full rosters of every single-A All-Star Game having Wikipedia articles forever - but maybe I was drunk. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to systematically analyze all of these players is insane. If you absolutely MUST list them on AFD, then close this bulk nom (which is invalid, since the players under consideration aren't all equivalent), and add two or three a day until they're all done. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the consensus about minor-league All-Stars being notable came from Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports), with some discussion before that from Wikipedia talk:Notability (athletes). Notability (sports) didn't pass as a whole because the scope was too broad, but there was pretty widespread agreement about the baseball guidelines there. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion about adopting those guidelines for the project can be found here. Spanneraol (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to say it but that discussion appears to have lasted less than one hour and involved all of three people, two of which were clearly on one side of the issue before the conversation took place. No, I don't know where everyone else was at the time, but I think you'd get some different answers now. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports) discussions lasted for much longer and involved many different people. Spanneraol (talk) 17:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, are we talking about Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#Minor League Players and Wikipedia talk:Notability (sports)#AAA Baseball? Where you and the sock of a banned user (Jmfangio) were in agreement on one side while only two or three other people participated? Jaranda (talk · contribs) was starting to bend towards the current guidelines but he and his various socks seem to have disappeared as well. As I said, that guidelines really need to be revisited. If this AFD ends up in a huge deadlock as a few peo-keep people have predicted, I'll be happy to start that dialogue (time permitting of course). —Wknight94 (talk) 17:35, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the guidelines really need to be revisited then revisit them - there. AfD nominations are not the way to change guidelines you disagree with. Kinston eagle (talk) 17:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We've already got five people here who seem pretty firm in their opposition, so let's ride this one out and see where it takes us. It may be a perfect start to discussion there. But yes, everyone watching here please be on the look out at WT:MLB for notability guideline discussions (or feel free to start them there yourself). —Wknight94 (talk) 17:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's mostly just you that is opposed to the guidelines... The other people who voted with you on here didn't seem to be aware of them. Spanneraol (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, that plays right into my point, thank you. By and large, the only people voting to keep in this or my other recent AFDs have been citing this skewed biased guideline. The people that aren't aware of that guideline think for themselves and come to a "delete" conclusion. Very telling. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So if this were a mass AFD about all 30+ bands signed to a particular label (without regard for sales figures or Grammy nominations or whatnot), and none of the participants in the AFD were aware of (or interested in) WP:MUSIC, in your view that'd be a good thing? Or is it only a "skewed, biased guideline" because you personally happen to disagree with it? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) It's a skewed biased guideline because only two or three people were part of the discussion that formed it and they were already predisposed to one side of the issue. Pretty clear cut what will happen in that case. (I think I've already said this somewhere.) —Wknight94 (talk) 17:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that if you look at the links I provided, there are more than "two or three people" commenting. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 19:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep the following players as they clearly satisfy Wikipedia:WPBB#Players

Brandon Roberts, Rene Tosoni, Edward Ovalle, Steve Singleton, Daniel Lehmann, Matthew Williams, Spencer Steedley, Oswaldo Sosa, Blair Erickson, Cole Devries, Alex Burnett, Wilson Ramos, Brian Dinkelman, Robert Delaney, Danny Hernandez, Tyler Robertson, Deolis Guerra, Will Inman, Jose Mijares

Weak Delete the following, unless notability is established:

Danny Santiesteban, Carlos Gutierrez (baseball), Kyle Waldrop, Allan de San Miguel, Whit Robbins, Matthew Fox (baseball), Jose Lugo, Danny Berg, Yancarlos Ortiz, Johnny Woodard, Juan Portes, Chris Parmelee, Yangervis Solarte, ~~Will Inman~~

Not sure about:

~~Tyler Robertson, Deolis Guerra~~

If it's too much for the closing nom, then just KEEP ALL. This is a screwed up nom anyway that cites WP:WPBB#Players as the reason to delete, yet backtracks the second people point out that most of these players satisify at least one guideline there. SashaNein (talk) 18:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, someone actually managed to divide them up! Well done. Could have been done with a little with less venom but I guess that goes for all of your recent votes to my latest AFDs. Try to ease up a bit please - an ounce of honey and all that. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just to clarify what Sasha is referring to, the specific guideline is that a minor league player is notable if they "Have... been selected for any minor league baseball All-star game in the affiliated minor leagues." which is true of Roberts, Tosoni, Ovalle, etc. Mass nominations are the only way to respond to mass creation of a shrine. When you set about to create 33 individual pages for the 33 guys on the roster of your favorite single-A league team, it's disruptive. Do you plan to create a new article every time someone takes the field? I'd say that the closing administrator should go with the breakdown outlined by Sasha, but I'm sure that we'll get a "no consensus, default to keep" decision. Mandsford (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guerra also played in the All-Star Futures Game. I would primarily agree with the breakdown that Sasha has proposed as far as which players are notable and which aren't. Keep Guerra too and I'm fine with that list. Spanneraol (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - Players in class A are essentially in a training and development program for Major League Baseball. Many of them will be out of baseball in two or three years and will not be public figures. Thus, having biographies on players at such a low level raises serious BLP concerns (who will be tending these articles five years from now?) I think the appropriate approach is similar to what WP:BLP1E recommends--write an article about the team, maybe even an entire, well-documented article about their season, but not biographies for the individual players. BRMo (talk) 03:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And this, in turn, is why we do not hold that all class-A ballplayers are notable, but rather limit it to the players who make All-Star teams or set records, to distinguish themselves. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone have a list of everyone that has made A-level All-Star teams in the past? I'm curious to see if it would change my opinion at all. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All A-level teams, ever? That'd be a big honkin' list. You can find individual leagues' single-season lists on The Baseball Cube - for example, here's the list of Sally (South Atlantic) League All-Stars from 2000. For that season, 7 out of the 11 (Hamilton, Byrd, House, Ford, Calzado, Tsao, and Williams) eventually played in the majors. Here's the FSL list for the same year. 8 of 15 have made the majors so far (Hafner, Harang, Redding, Mench, Jodie, Snyder, Machado, and Lawrence), and several others are established AAA vets who might get a callup (or make an Olympic/WBC roster) in the future. I don't know whether those are particularly representative, but they pass my smell test as such. You can find further teams by navigating to the appropriate year and then picking your league from the drop-down menu. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that this is one of the reasons we accepted ASG appearances in the affiliated minors as evidence of notability - most of the guys who meet that benchmark end up as ML players a few years down the road anyway, and it's a bitch to try and recreate a decent section on their minor league experiences after the fact. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, it took me one try to shoot down this theory in my mind. Look at the Arizona League All-Stars from the same year: Alvin Colina played two games in the majors in 2006 ---- and that the sum total of major league experience from that list. No one else has done so much as play a full season at the AAA level. The MVP of the league that year is only now playing partial seasons at the AAA level. Several of them are out of baseball entirely now. Someone would need to convince me that that was an anomaly or I'm back at my original view that A-level anything counts zero towards notability. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Arizona Fall League is a bad example... thats an offseason league that is not a full league and contains more marginal prospects. Spanneraol (talk) 00:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And yet that's conveniently missing from the guideline. That thing is paper thin, isn't it. That's what happens when two people already on one side of an issue discuss guidelines by themselves. You really should have waited for dissenting opinions before blasting it into the project page that way. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, good grief. The Arizona League (different from the AFL) is short-season ball for rookies. That's not a fully professional league - it's more like an orientation camp. They only play maybe 50 games. (And big surprise that most of those guys haven't made the majors yet... they were 17 or 18 in 2000, so they're only 25 or 26 now.) When we talk about A-level ball, we're talking about the following leagues: California, Carolina, Florida State, Midwest, and South Atlantic. And if you look at the teams for any of those leagues, you'll find that the majority of their All-Stars end up in the majors. And if you don't think this is articulated explicitly enough in the guideline, you were more than welcome to add your input when it was under discussion, at any time in the last three years. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Three years? The discussion that led to WP:WPBB#Players appears to have lasted literally an hour and was put in place so fast that apparently few of us noticed. The number of people that have voted "Delete all" (or all but one) should be a clear indicator that the guideline was put in place far too hastily. And I'll be inviting everyone at all of my recent AFDs (on both sides - don't start shouting WP:CANVAS) to weigh in on a rewrite of that guideline. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you picked 2000, let's look at the record for actual A-ball All Stars that year. In addition to the SAL and FSL, which I already provided, here are the other A-ball leagues and the success rates of their All-Stars: California (8 of 13 - Rodriguez, Bloomquist, Thurston, Sledge, Ludwick, Torcato, Bynum, and Ramos). Carolina (only 4 of 13 - Figgins, Ellis, Snead, and Davis, plus Valenzuela playing on Mexico's national team during the WBC). Midwest (7 of 14 - Pujols, Santiago, Snelling, Lane, Kearns, Trujillo, and Bartosh, plus Martin playing in NPB (the Japanese Central League)). If you look at it for any other year, it'll be pretty much the same. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All of which overlooks, of course, that if you're willing to go into back issues of Baseball America, you've got enough info to write a full, encyclopedic article about basically anyone who was ever considered a prospect. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just contradicted yourself. You hinted that it was difficult to find information on prospects if you waited until after they became major leaguers. Now you're saying all you have to do is look up Baseball America. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said that it's a bitch, not that it's impossible. You need a pretty comprehensive library, or one with an online database of periodicals, to find back issues of BA - not many institutions subscribe. And while a lot of the content is cross-ported to their website, much of it is subscriber-only content (and most things seem to vanish after about five years - the same amount of time it takes a high school prospect to reach the majors). You can do it, and do a good job of it, if you're willing to make a library visit - but being realistic, how many people here bother with that anymore? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 19:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to point out again that the original notability discussions lasted for a few months (not one hour) before a guidelines was drawn up at notability:sports... then we briefly discussed adopting it on the project page... and it wasn't till several hours after that discussion during which no one objected that they were added to the project guidelines. Spanneraol (talk) 18:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If we're going to go with Sasha's list, then please note that Inman participated in the Futures Game this year[1] and was a South Atlantic League All-Star in 2006[2]. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- let's not forget Jose Mijares is on the 40-man roster, and is set to be called up to the major leagues on September 1st, when rosters expand. Shapiros10 ^{contact me}_{My work} 15:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jose Mijares, delete rest - Minor league players may meet the letter of WP:ATHLETE, but I don't believe that feeder leagues can be treated as professional leagues, even if they are paid players. It's just a difference of interpretation. Mijares, however, should be kept as a member of a MLB 40 man roster. matt91486 (talk) 04:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It sounds as though minor league all-stars and award winners are being considered for articles because they are a good indicator that they may make the major leagues some day. Did anyone notice that that flies in the face of WP:NOTCRYSTAL and the last sentence of WP:NTEMP? Look what would happen if we continued that trend - as Hit bull, win steak (talk · contribs) already researched, around 50% of all A-level all-stars make it to the majors. But according to the guideline, everyone is within their rights to create articles for all of those players including the 40-50% that never made the majors. Quite a few of them not only never made the majors, they never even made it out of AA ball (I also checked this briefly last night and can provide a breakdown when I am nearer to that computer). So, project that out over the years and Wikipedia could potentially end up with hundreds of articles about players who excelled at the single-A level but were not good enough to get past AA - and, since notability is not temporary, none of them could be deleted! Is that really what people want here?! —Wknight94 (talk) 18:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is the appropriate place for this discussion. If we want to rehash the notability arguments, let's take it back to the project page.. We've all voted on this AFD already and under the current guidelines, I think Sasha's list should be what the closing admin goes with. Spanneraol (talk) 18:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, this was mostly in response to issues raised above, but it's gotten so jumbled up there that I jumped down here instead. But yes, I'll be re-raising this issue at WT:MLB soon. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you didn't want this to get sidetracked into a discussion about guidelines, you probably should've made a few individual nominations as I suggested earlier, rather than one big bulk one. With the way the issue was presented, how could the discussion here have gone any other way? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 20:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Minor league All-Stars receive a lot of coverage in their own right. I brought up the examples of minor league All-Stars becoming major leaguers in the hope that you'd find the notion of forcing people to re-create huge masses of encyclopedic content distasteful, and withdraw your objection. If that's not the case, then I'll be glad to fight the issue on its own merits. Even if a prospect "merely" reaches AA after becoming a minor-league All Star, he's often been the subject of significant media coverage for four or five years, starting with the moment when he was drafted. Profiles, interviews, scouting reports... all published by reputable and reliable sources. Even if you think it's stupid that so many people pay attention to minor league baseball, and write about it, WP:N and WP:V still apply. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 20:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I don't remember saying it's "stupid"... Anyway... I think this AFD - as jumbled as it is - has shown that the general community does not consider career minor league players to be notable. That's the key. I'm not talking about verifiability. The problem is that the sources are still not weighing enough to lead to notability. Maybe in-depth baseball magazines and web sites - and even MLB.com itself all report on a single-A all-star. Certainly local newspapers - all plenty reliable - are mentioning his name and writing long stories. But the general community here has still never heard of him and, when he is brought to AFD, if the general community says "What? Who? The lowest level of minor league baseball? No way." over and over, then the consensus has to be that single-A all-stars are non-notable. The community should be determining the project guideline, not the other way around. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So someone is only notable if the "general community" has heard of them? I don't recall that being in any guidelines. Lots of notable people the community has never heard of.. And I don't think you can take the "consensus" is that they are non-notable from a few people posting in this afd.. many people have posted on the "keep" side.. I don't see the consensus you mention. And "A" ball is NOT the "lowest level of minor league baseball"... rookie leagues are below them and various other instructional leagues. Spanneraol (talk) 21:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think happens at AFD? The "general community" decides if someone is notable. Sure I can use a project's guidelines to get my bearings but I can also choose to ignore those. See the first paragraph of the WP:CONSENSUS policy where consensus at a smaller scale (like a project I figure) cannot over-ride consensus on a wider scale. And I know, big difference on the rookie league vs. A-level - until you look at the guideline where no distinction is made. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "how many people have heard of it" standard is a terrible way to assess notability. How many people have heard of Samuel Dibble, or Daniel E. Somes, or Case Broderick? If there's widespread media coverage of someone throughout the course of their professional life, then they're notable - whether the random group of people on AFD one day happen to have heard of him or not. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 21:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use whatever term you'd like. The reality is that baseball stars are just that - baseball stars. They're famous. People pride themselves on knowing every guy that has merely stepped up to the plate for their favorite team. When I see a baseball AFD, I'm not expecting to have to look too hard to find some information on them. Google lights up with mentions as soon as they've hit the majors. If I have to dig into the "prospects" section of some years-old Baseball America magazine just to find their name on a single list of All-Stars and to prove that the person even played baseball, something is wrong. The notability line for baseball players has always been very clearly drawn - the major leagues. That's been the line in the real world and we're supposed to be reflecting what is in the real world. On the few specialized web sites where minor league stats are becoming available, like BaseballCube, there are still factual errors! In my scan through 2000 single-A all-stars, I found the 2000 Midwest League all-stars which includes a pitcher named Chris Dilullo. But you click on the Chris Dilullo link and you get that he played at the University of Delaware in 2007 and 2008. Huh?! How was he a 2000 single-A all-star but then in college in 2007 and 2008?! Baseball-reference's search shows no Chris Dilullo and its minor league section doesn't show all-stars apparently so I clicked on every team individually - no Chris Dilullo. So, suddenly, not only am I bothered by the notability of these players but I'm even questioning the reliability of the sources that are being used for them. Sorry if I have difficulty getting behind this idea given these odds. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Baseball Cube isn't a 100% reliable source. I linked to it because you asked for a list of minor league All-Stars across multiple years and seasons, and it's the best option online. I didn't think you'd probably react positively if I told you to go to a library and look at one of the various print annuals (published by BA, TSN, etc.), which are what I'd actually use if I were writing an article and needed sourcing on an All-Star appearance. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 15:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it does make that notability line hard to miss, doesn't it? Major leaguer: type the name into any search engine anywhere or grab a sports magazine off the shelf of your local convenient store. Minor leaguer: start making phone calls and hope you can find a library that carries a particular magazine within 100 miles - and then hope they also carry some sort of index for that magazine or else you're gonna be turning random pages for the afternoon. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most current minor leaguers you can also punch their name into a search engine and find information on them, people from the "pre-google" days require a bit more research but more and more of that info is becoming available online as well. Spanneraol (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found an error on the New York Mets' website. Your point?--Johnny Spasm (talk) 09:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hhmmm... Maybe I'm biased as the creator of these articles, but I had the opposite reaction to this spirited debate. I think this AFD-- as jumbled as it is-- has shown that enough people in the general community DO consider minor league players to be notable enough to keep their articles. If they were completely insignificant, and I was dead wrong to create them, the response would have overwelmingly shown that. It hasn't.

I would definitely call this a hung jury, and move for aquittal.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 21:22, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: For what it's worth, I also disagree with the concept that notability is not temporary. Stars rise and fall all the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm (talk • contribs) 21:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to what some people on this page believe, the FSL and Class A are, by far, NOT the lowest minor league level. In addition, there is no team in any pro baseball league called "Miracles". WE NEED PEOPLE WHO KNOW ABOUT BASEBALL TO BE COMMENTING ON THIS PAGE OTHER THAN MYSELF AND JOHNNY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.9.150.111 (talk) 03:33, 31 July 2008 (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.