Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don James Alto (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. W.marsh 18:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Don James Alto
Has been up for AFD before, but was kept because he "He won the Cadet Boys Singles category at the 2006 US Open Table Tennis Champianship" [sic]. However, unfortunately for mr. Alto, winning boys' tournaments is not enough to satisfy the WP:BIO guidelines. Punkmorten 14:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Consensus was reached previously on keep. Vassyana 13:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- No. Have you read the AFD? Secondly, that's irrelevant for this case. Punkmorten 14:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I have read the previous AFD, please assume good faith. The result was keep with three editors weighing in against one. Per WP:BIO he is notable. "Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports or other competitive activities that are themselves considered notable, including college sports in the United States." He not only played in the US Open Table Tennis Championship, he won in his category. This places him above the requirements for notability. Vassyana 11:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- He fails the central criterion for inclusion though, as he hasn't been a primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of him. Furthermore if the unverifiable information is removed the article becomes "Don James Alto is a Table Tennis Player who won the Cadet Boys Singles category at the 2006 US Open Table Tennis Champianship". One Night In Hackney 11:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- He seems to have been very active in the table tennis circuit, including playing for the US national team. As examples: He placed 4th in the 2004 nationals[1] and won the bronze in the 2004 California State Games[2]. He also placed 2nd (Finalist) in the 2005 Sandiego Open[3] and placed the same in the 2006 Berkley Open[4]. He was also part of the 2005 U.S. National TT team[5]. It at least seems to me that he is clearly notable in his sport. Of course, that is just my opinion from the research I have done. Vassyana 16:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- He fails the central criterion for inclusion though, as he hasn't been a primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of him. Furthermore if the unverifiable information is removed the article becomes "Don James Alto is a Table Tennis Player who won the Cadet Boys Singles category at the 2006 US Open Table Tennis Champianship". One Night In Hackney 11:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I have read the previous AFD, please assume good faith. The result was keep with three editors weighing in against one. Per WP:BIO he is notable. "Sportspeople/athletes/competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports or other competitive activities that are themselves considered notable, including college sports in the United States." He not only played in the US Open Table Tennis Championship, he won in his category. This places him above the requirements for notability. Vassyana 11:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- No. Have you read the AFD? Secondly, that's irrelevant for this case. Punkmorten 14:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Not enough source material to create an encyclopedic article, the only thing that can be verified is that he won a tournament. One Night In Hackney 00:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Weak keep - WP:BIO is a very sensible guideline, however the sections being quoted are currently under discussion. In my view, the central criterion approach is viable, however there should be some flexibility. This article has 7 references that cover every statement in the article. Also, given his age, I can't help think if we delete now, someone is going to have to spend unnecessary time recreating this information. Addhoc 16:00, 5 February 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.
