Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben LeCompte

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 keep. The argument that the coverage establishes WP:GNG-based notability carries the day. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ben LeCompte

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

Not notable college football player. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:43, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm more inclined to make an exception for this player: two-time all-American for Division I-FCS, and punters are far more likely to move from FCS to NFL. I found this article and video in the news that points toward notability. Others include Chicago Daily Herald and Brainered Dispatch. These point to passing WP:GNG based on coverage and college career.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:19, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the Chicago Daily Herald piece constitutes significant coverage. Another is this from the Chicago Sun-Times. Cbl62 (talk) 14:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete His actions in college do not reach the level of notability there, he does not pass the guidelines for pro-gridiron players. He does not meet our guidelines at present, which are the absolute minimum it is reasonable to create an article with in the case of football players.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The question is if he passes GNG. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed failing WP:NGRIDIRON does not mean notability is not achieved, there are multiple paths to notability.--Paul McDonald (talk) 00:21, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

+3. Subject-specific guidelines (sometimes referred to as secondary notability guidelines) do not trump WP:GNG or other subject-specific guidelines guidelines such as WP:BIO. Also, meeting WP:GRIDIRON, which dictates presumed notability, is not an "absolute minimum" for an American football player to qualify for an article on Wikipedia at all. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes GNG with sources presented by Paul McDonald and Cbl62. Additional sources, [1][2][3][4][5] WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 18:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The subject meets WP:BASIC per a review of available sources, although on a slightly weaker level, as some of the articles are a bit short in length/coverage. However, several sources are longer and provide a sufficient depth of coverage. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:44, 23 October 2016 (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.