Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tex Sanner

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 delete. User:Bbny-wiki-editor has made a compelling argument, but unfortunately it is based on the presumption that there could be sources, and several editors rebut this squarely. Tridentman123's drive-by "keep per" argument is not particularly weighty. So I interpret this a narrow consensus to delete.

Given that the article subject predates the internet, no one should interpret this AfD as a prejudice against re-creating this article with more extensive sourcing that would meet the WP:GNG, if not WP:BASE/N. A Train^talk 08:35, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tex Sanner[edit]

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

PROD removed with no reason given by the article's creator. Non-notable individual, fails WP:GNG and WP:BASE/N. WP:BURDEN is on the article creator to provide sources. One MiLB.com story isn't enough. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:37, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:37, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:37, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Several sources listed. It seems highly unlikely that a guy who played ~15 years of professional baseball didn't generate enough coverage to pass GNG, even if those sources aren't readily available online. - Bbny-wiki-editor (talk) 08:17, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Most of the sources listed seem to confirm this isn't a hoax, but doesn't provide deep, significant coverage. WP:BURDEN is on the article creator to find these sources that may or may not exist. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:09, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Independent of whether this subject is notable - I am sympathetic to Bbny-wiki-editor's argument, but not convinced given that he never even reached the highest level of the minor leagues - this article seems to have similar copyright issues as Jim Matthews (baseball). In this case the issues seem slightly less concerning (there is only one editor to the BR-Bullpen article here, who may be the same as the Wikipedia editor who started this article) and there are some small differences between the Wikipedia article and the BR-Bullpen article (although that doesn't really matter if the GNU license of the BR-Bullpen article is not compatible with Wikipedia's license). Since I reported the Jim Matthews article at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2017 August 3 and that remains open I will hold off on taking action on this one until the Jim Matthews issue is resolved. Although if someone else feels that action is needed on this article, they should not let my forbearance impede them. Rlendog (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The official Wikipedia policy is here, especially in the section WP:COPY#Additional availability of text under the GNU Free Documentation License. Rlendog (talk) 12:52, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 16:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm sympathetic to Bbny-wiki-editor's argument, having a sharp and longstanding disagreement with the bulk of the baseball editors on the premise that someone can play an inning for MLB and be presumptively notable, where someone who plays a thousand games in a major metropolitan area isn't as long as it's a minor-league city. But that being said, the GNG isn't satisfied by asserting that sources might exist. It's only satisfied by demonstrating that they do exist. That hasn't happened here. Ravenswing 17:37, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per bbny TridentMan123 (talk) 19:27, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The highest level of baseball Sanner played was Double-A. He wasn't good enough to even sniff the Majors. We have to draw a line somewhere, and he's well below that threshold. caknuck _° needs to be running more often 09:42, 14 August 2017 (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.