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 all except Victor Payne. Per request below, I am userfying other articles for User:Paulmcdonald. lifebaka++ 18:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Max Holm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Joe Banks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Ross Fiscus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Graydon Long (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Samuel Boyle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Forrest Craver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Victor Payne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

These do not appear to meet WP:BIO, WP:ATHLETE or WP:NOTABILITY and article lacks non-trivial coverage in reliable, independent sources. See also a similar AFD currently in progress at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter J. West. Kittybrewster [[User_talk:Kittybrewster|☎12:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all except Victor Payne per nom and discussion at Walter J. West. Suspect there's going to be a lot of these. Not sure how these six were chosen as there's at least another 10 very similar articles just for Geneva College Golden Tornadoes. Looking at the templates that are in the same categories I suspect we're going to be up in the hundreds somewhere. About to AfD the rest of the coaches of Geneva College Golden Tornadoes where the only reference is there record and there's no other assertion of notability. Dpmuk (talk) 18:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Victor Payne wasn't part of this AfD when I first commented. As a) he's a basketball coach and b) he's coached multiple teams (according to the article) I think a sperate AfD is needed. Dpmuk (talk) 20:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will add that I personally think that Victor Payne should be deleted as well, I'm just not sure this is the right AfD to consider it as it's a different situation to the other articles. Dpmuk (talk) 10:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Victor Payne (no comment on the others). I think the problem isn't that he is not notable; just that the article stub doesn't establish that notability. I can bulk up the article but hate to waste my time doing so if it is just going to be deleted. I would have preferred to have it tagged {{prod}} first so I could work on it in order to avoid a deletion discussion. →Wordbuilder (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: A link to this discussion has been posted at WikiProject Texas Tech University. →Wordbuilder (talk) 19:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete All: With the exception of Payne, they all fall under the West precedent, being coaches for an obscure Bible Christian college that only this year started playing Division III NCAA football, far below the "highest level" threshold of amateur athletics, that WP:ATHLETE does not encompass coaches, and that no information seems available about any of them save that they coached at the school and what their won-loss records were. Texas Tech is plainly a more important school, but the Payne article has no information at all save that he coached there, which frankly puts it into the CSD camp for little or no content.  RGTraynor  19:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question what does the type of school have to do with the program or the coach? Why do you say it is an "obscure" Bible college? And being short on content makes it a stub article, not a reason to delete the article. Wikipedia is a Wiki, which means that other researchers will come along and pick up where these articles stand to further improve them. What your talking about are content issues and not deletion issues.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep West precedent? "West Precedent"  ???? One AFD goes to delete and now you claim precedent? Okay, I'm glad you brought up precedent... of the five hundred to a thousand or so more college football head coach articles on Wikipedia, many of which have gone through the AFD process and the consensus has chosen to keep. You claim precedent of one, I claim precedent of five hundred to a thousand.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete All (except Payne) Division three coaches are not notable. No independant sources. -Djsasso (talk) 19:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• As RGTraynor pointed out, Payne coached at Texas Tech, which is a Division 1 school. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Still has no content or sources. I personally don't think even D-I coaches make the grade. Unfortuantely there is no provision for this one way or the other in WP:ATHLETE. -Djsasso (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Texas Tech is a Division I school now. It wasn't anywhere near the top rung of things 85 years ago.  RGTraynor  12:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Response Please review NCAA Division History. 85 years ago (1923) there were no divisions in the NCAA, and the NAIA wouldn't form until 1937.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree about its lack of content. I'm working on it now. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there a difference between division I and division III (or football vs baseball) so far as NOTABILITY of WP:ATHLETE is concerned? Kittybrewster ☎ 07:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes. "Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports." Leaving aside those who don't believe that coaches at any level qualify as competitors (me being one) and those who don't believe that amateur sports should qualify where there are professional leagues, where football is concerned, Division I = "highest level," Division III is three rungs below that.  RGTraynor  12:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• And other than college football, most sports projects don't consider Division I athletes to meet WP:ATHLETE in that their sports have a professional level and WP:ATHLETE seems to imply that if there is a professional level of your sport then that is the highest level you have to meet. -Djsasso (talk) 14:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think that is implied at all. Based on its wording, both highest-level amateur and professional athletes should be included:

• Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis.
• Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports.

• I expanded Victor Payne. It is now over four times larger (including refs) than when it was nominated for deletion. I think the article should be kept. At the least, it should be considered separately, rather than part of a mass deletion nomination. →Wordbuilder (talk) 21:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I honestly don't see it; it's still a list of nothing more than where he coached in what years and with what won-lost records, and it's tough to claim that Texas Tech was a major college sports power in the early 1920s. Do we know anything about him? Biographical information, dates of birth or death, anything?  RGTraynor  03:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Temporary reprieve for Payne in the spirit of article improvement, with a suggestion to develop a consensus at WP:ATHLETE about coaching staff (I'd argue that the coaches of teams whose members meet the requirement might themselves do so, but I can see the opposition viewpoint; discussion is required). Delete the rest. Serpent's Choice (talk) 23:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Please Move Discussion All of a sudden, there are a large number of college football head coach articles being considered for deletion. There has always been a trickle--one or two at a time, but my current count shows 28 articles for deletion, and I'm sure I'm missing many. One editor has achieved a deletion of Walter J. West and is now claiming "precedent" to delete coaches. I suggest (and have been suggesting for some time now) moving these argument to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Notability so that we can have a uniform and open discussion about what truly makes a notable college football coach. This will prevent arguing article-at-a-time and help to make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia. It will prevent a "scramble" on both sides of the argument and make for a single place to come to a true consensus instead of a hit-or-miss end result.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: People having general discussions is a good thing, and when and if WP:ATHLETE is amended to explicitly grant prima facie notability to coaches of even the lowest possible levels of college ball, of course we ought to rule on black letter policy.  RGTraynor  02:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Response so let's have that general discussion! But no one has bothered to visit Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Notability and make a change or comment for some time now. A few editors (two or three, I think) talk "general discussions are good" but then flatly refuse to do so and instead continue spamming deletions. Last count shows 57 AfDs (one nomination was withdrawn).--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:25, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• About the same number of editors as is responsible for your Wikiprojects notability essay, I discovered. That being said, perhaps I should speak more plainly. You and the other two or three editors over on your Wikiproject, as well as any other interested parties, may have as many discussions as you please on whatever subjects seem to you good. In the meantime, those of us who keep finding these threadbare stubs on non-notable subjects which violate WP:BIO and WP:V will continue to file AfDs on them. We are under no onus to cease to do so, to engage in discussions over notability essays that would be no more binding for our presence than otherwise, or to agree with you that everyone who has coached a single game at any college at any level is automatically notable.  RGTraynor  20:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request As discussed on the AfD talk page, if this article (or any of the series of articles) is closed as a delete, please kindly first move the article to User:Paulmcdonald/Articlename, where "Articlename" is the name of the article (or articles) being removed. Also, please note the new page location at User:Paulmcdonald/deletedcoach so we can be sure to find the moved page.
Why? There have been, at present count, 58 articles of our project placed on the AfD list and there is just not enough time to adequately and appropriately respond and ultimately improve the articles themselves. This would give the project memebers time to work on improving the articles. This request should in no way imply that I believe that the article (or articles) in quesiton should be deleted at this time. I am making a simple cut-n-paste request due to the sheer volume of AfDs in such a short period of time.--Paul McDonald (talk) 00:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Definite keep for Victor Payne as a major DI school's basketball coach. Would someone please strike him from the nominated articles? matt91486 (talk) 22:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the others as non-notable small college coaches with no other discernible claims to notability. matt91486 (talk) 22:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Instead, merge the others to a list and redirect the individual articles there. There is enough content for a list of all coaches from the school. matt91486 (talk) 01:16, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all except Victor Payne, per the previous AFDs. WikiProjects don't get to set their own notability levels. Stifle (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Whatever you think about Geneva's coaches, please don't denigrate us as a Bible college: we have a Bible department, but we have plenty of other studies as well, and engineering and business are our strongest points. Nyttend (talk) 16:32, 22 September 2008 (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.