Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/J. J. Thiel
- Question why is it "precedence" when there is one AfD discussion that says "delete" and "WAX" when twenty-four say keep? And remember, I didn't bring up precedence... the deletion argument did.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- You already raised this issue in the Holm AfD, and if you require a reiteration, so be it. (1) Dahlene passes WP:ATHLETE as a prominent kicker for a major college program and WP:PROF as a college president, both long-held to be prima-facie passes; (2) Moulton's nomination was withdrawn after you claimed that he was an Olympic athlete, another prima facie pass on WP:ATHLETE, although your evidence for the same never was revealed or made it into the article; (3) Taylor was a state official prominent in the civil rights controversies of the 1950s; (4) Wright was elected to a Hall of Fame ... so all those are discredited.
Gottsch, Stevens and the SINGLE Prairie View mass AfD, I'll grant you, a decision based upon your misleading inference that CFB:COACH was an official notability guideline and a misreading of the then-current wording of "Competitors and coaches who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them)" from WP:ATHLETE. You failed completely to cite, in those AfDs, that the coaches neither competed at the highest level in amateur sports (that being Division I NCAA football), nor that they met the general criteria of secondary sources, thus discrediting the whole lot as precedent. Ravenswing 19:19, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- clarification there is no intention to mislead. It's not misleading to quote an essay and call it an essay. CFB:COACH is clearly labeled an essay and not a policy. Wording of WP:ATHLETE has been modified since the essay was created. Many of these coaches (J.J. Thiel included) were active before there was an NAIA, or any division within the NCAA and therefore would be in the highest level of college football just on that. The misleading statements have actually come from your arguments. And if I have made any mis-statement please specifically point it out so that it can be corrected (such as claiming that a coach was in a lower division of the NCAA when there were no lower divisions at that time). I'm after truth here.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, for openers, how about claiming that Moulton should be kept because he was an Olympic athlete, when you got the wrong Fay Moulton? And in which of those AfDs did you state that CFB:COACH was an essay? Just a few days ago you were stating that it was, in fact, a valid notability guideline. By contrast, I have made no misleading statements, relying on black letter policy throughout. Ravenswing 19:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- 1) I added a merge tag to Moulton several months ago because I thought they might be the same person. It turns out that they were not as SYSS Mouse confirmed on May 8 (check the history of the page). 2) Fay G. Moulton was a head coach at Kansas State Univeristy which is now a Division I FBS school and not related to this discussion at all. 3) A "guideline" is not the same thing as a "policy". "Guidelines" are used for notability essays. 4) CFB:COACH specifically states it is an essay and any editor can check the page to verify. 5) How does continually calling me a liar when there are historical archives of the pages that anyone can look at comply with "black letter of policy throughout" ?? Wikipedia is about truth, not falsehoods and you have obviously been digging like crazy into my editing and contribution history.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)