Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne Turner (ice hockey)

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 merge to Beanpot (ice hockey). –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne Turner (ice hockey)[edit]

Non-notable amateur hockey player who fails to meet WP:ATHLETE and WP:N or the WP:HOCKEY notability requirements for hockey players. Djsasso (talk) 20:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hockey-related deletion discussions. —Djsasso (talk) 20:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per lack of notability. GoodDay (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is significant coverage of the Beanpot, and not having a page on Wayne Turner is a diservice to the tournament. He is one of the most important players in the tournament. He is in the Beanpot Hall of Fame and Northeastern Hall of Fame. Below are links for two books that reference Turner. Google 1 & Google 2 Also see: youtube called the greatest play ever the tournament. Turner is a legend. Any article that talks about the Beanpot and its history, mentions Turner.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nusportsinfo (talk • contribs) 20:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What you need to read is WP:BLP1E which as mentioned below I think applies in this situation. He was only notable for that one event of scoring that one goal. He never went on to play professional hockey, not even in the minor leagues. While it might be a big deal to fans of that universities sports, that doesn't mean he is notable on a wider scale. -Djsasso (talk) 02:23, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I hear what you both parties are saying here, but Djsasso I think you might be missing the importance of this tournament and Northeastern winning it that first time. It pretty much changed the landscape of college hockey in Massachusetts, prior to this it was basically a three team game, after the win, it became a four team game. I think most Harvard, Boston University, or Boston College fans, or college hockey fans in general, would understand the importance and the significance of this player. Now the below suggestion of merging it into the Beanpot section has some merit, but personally I believe it is deserved of its own section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.119.5 (talk) 03:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC) — 71.232.119.5 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Merge and redirect to Beanpot (ice hockey). Google sources make Turner look like your classic WP:ONEEVENT kind of guy. Rklear (talk) 21:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge Suggest these readings as well Boston Globe 1 Boston Globe 2 Boston Globe 3 Though mergering might work well, cannot be deleted, that is for sure kabubbies (talk) 04:09 9 January 2009 (UTC) — Kabubbies (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Again those still don't help the issue as failing WP:BLP1E. He was only slightly notable for a single goal. -Djsasso (talk) 04:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, only one goal... but the article that would absorb this bio isn't about the one goal or even the one game, it is about the Beanpot tournament generally and doesn't really allow for the proper explanation of the event in a non-awkward fashion. In addition, the significance of the goal lies far outside the scope of the one event and deserves mention in the Northeastern Huskies article and Ice Hockey section as well. In a way, this is similar (though, not as important as this is a more local event) to Doug Flutie's Hail Mary pass' effect on the Boston College Eagles football organization. ~ Paul^T+/_C 21:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Even the goal itself is barely notable and as you say locally notable. Beanpot itself might not be the place for it, but perhaps in the athletics section of the universities page or as is the case for a number of other NCAA ice hockey teams, a start for their own ice hockey team article (ie Denver Pioneers men's ice hockey). But as a bio of a player it utterly fails notability requirements. This article is about the player not the goal which is what BLP1E says not to do. -Djsasso (talk) 00:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - What is particularly interesting is that neither Turner nor this famous goal are mentioned at Northeastern Huskies#Men's hockey, the place you would expect to see them featured. There's just a sentence about the team winning their only four Beanpots to date in that decade. Rklear (talk) 23:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to meet Wikpedia's standards for notability. Edward321 (talk) 15:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Move This article (once it is properly sourced) can satisfy WP:N by elaborating on the effect of Turner's goal beyond just the Beanpot to the Huskies Ice Hockey operations generally. It may not deserve to be a bio, but perhaps an article about the specific game? ~ Paul^T+/_C 21:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- An article about the 1980 Beanpot Championship would seem to perhaps make more sense, should that be created, or should we let this fully play out?Nusportsinfo-- (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Beanpot (ice hockey). It's already covered there and there isn't really anything else to be said. I tried to be bold and go ahead and do it, but it was reverted because the AfD is still open...--Smashville^talk 22:21, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to Beanpot (ice hockey). Lacks notability on his own, but should be included in tournament history section, which there is currently a small blurb. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 22:18, 10 January 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.