Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlton Dotson

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. (Non admin closure). Qst 18:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carlton Dotson

Carlton Dotson (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

He's a college kid who murdered someone and went to Jail. It was newsworthy, and we've got sources from newspapers, but I can't find evidence of any enduring significance beyond that. (If someone can fine). This isn't encyclopedic - we are not a database dump for yesterday's news. -Doc^g 17:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Keep Would be notable per WP:BIO anyways as a "Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them)." Also, this wasn't an average murder case that got a few blurbs in local press. This was a situation that recieved COPIOUS coverage in national news and print media, including ESPN and other sources. While I would agree that most murders are not in-and-of-themselves notable, this single one appears to be. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you explain how "highest level" includes a college team? And where are the secondary sources relating to his sports notability? --Doc^g 18:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Division I basketball is the highest level of amateur competition...there are already verifiable secondary sources in the article. But seriously...if that's the only thing you can come up with...Speedy Keep. This case was extremely notable, there are almost 4,000 google news hits for it from just about every media outlet you can name. Smashville 18:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Keep. Subject has some notability beyond a single event covered in the media (in this case, the murder). If coverage is limited to that murder, though, we need to cover the event - not the person - per WP:BLP1E. ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 17:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Where is the evidence of notability beyond the event?--Doc^g 18:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Where is the evidence of a lack of notability? Why does he have to be notable outside of the event? Charles Manson, Lee Harvey Oswald, Jeffrey Dahmer and David Berkowitz weren't notable outside of their murders. JonBenet Ramsey is only notable for being murdered. He was the subject of major national press for at least 3 years. Smashville 18:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Calm down. I'm willing to be convinced here. There are as it stands NO SOURCES in the article that show he'd be a notable athlete even if he'd not been murdering people. If they exist, I'll withdraw the nomination. Oswald etc are bad comparisons. They were and are continually discussed in serious literature decades later. The murders were notable not just for the murders but the ongoing impact, investigations, court cases, etc. All will be in books of significant murders for all eternity. Indeed any history of America will mention Oswald at least, and a history of crime likely to cite Manson. There's no evidence of that in this case. I'm willing to be convinced. Can you show some cultural impact, legal or investigative breakthrough, something to show this isn't just yesterday's news. As I say, I am truely willing to be convinced.--Doc^g 18:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not he was a notable athlete is irrelevant. That's not the primary source of his notability...However, per WP:BIO, "Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports" is generally notable. NCAA DI is the highest level of amateur basketball in the United States. Virtually all of the secondary sources refer to him as a "former Baylor basketball player". As for the murderers I used, I only used those as they were the most prominent. "Yesterday's news" is also known as history. The burden is on you to show why an article with significant coverage in at least 4,000 reliable secondary sources is not notable. Smashville 19:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep I honestly don't even understand how this comes up for deletion. Sorry Doc, but lack of personal knowledge on the topic does not make the topic non-notable. - Hansonc 21:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

keep per reasons above. the murder is notable, and technically, whether he committed a murder or not, he is notable as he performed at the "highest level in amateur sports" although that needs to be sourced. and yes I'm well aware and have had countless discussions about how many people this means there could be a wikipedia article on. But..as it has been said wikipedia is not paper. Barsportsunlimited 23:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, although I would move to 2007 Baylor basketball murder or similar and merge the victim in as well. Neither player was a particular standout even if both had prospects. There was heavy media attention as Division I college players almost never murder one another. But the case arguably was important just as much for the fallout, which included recruiting irregularities that were uncovered, leading Baylor to face NCAA suspension known as the "death penalty" (they barely escaped) and put themselves on three years' probation. The case spurred discussion about gun ownership on campuses as well as the NCAA rule about one-year scholarships, which put pressure on players and lead to transfers and less oversight/mentoring/etc. These aspects didn't subside entirely until 2005 or so. (Sorry, I had links for each of the above, but lost my post.) --Dhartung | Talk 00:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

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.