Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timothy Allen Olson

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 SPEEDY KEEP: withdrawing nomination (non-admin closure). G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 18:11, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Allen Olson[edit]

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

Non-notable runner; fails WP:NTRACK. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 13:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic ^{(talk | contribs)} 17:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic ^{(talk | contribs)} 17:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic ^{(talk | contribs)} 17:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:NTRACK doesn't consider trail runners or ultra runners. Anyone who sets a record at the Western States 100 ought to be considered notable as it is the most prestigious ultramarathon. I would argue that meets WP:ANYBIO ("The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.") In any case, he has a ton of coverage, more than enough to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. Here are some examples of coverage: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Additionally, he's been named male runner of the year by Competitor Group. Tchaliburton (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I have expanded the article and provided more citations, thus demonstrating his notability. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:04, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Referencing has been beefed up to show notability. I think this is a case where the nominator could have benefited from reviewing WP:BEFORE. G S Palmer, I hope you'll consider withdrawing your nomination so we can move on. T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 04:57, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Tchaliburton: I've read that. Also, withdrawing my nomination wouldn't mean anything. It'll be closed as "keep" soon enough. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 13:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing your nomination allows it to be closed more quickly without the need to waste more time discussing it. But seeing as you're now acknowledging that the subject is notable I think it would be fair for the admin to close it as a snow keep. T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 16:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Tchaliburton: I acknowledge that they are notable, and that I made a mistake. I don't see any point in rushing to close this, but since you ask, I will withdraw my nomination. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 18:11, 17 December 2014 (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.