Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homer E. Woodling

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 keep. Mangojuicetalk 19:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Homer E. Woodling

Homer E. Woodling (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Fails WP:NOTE; #1 search result is the Wikipedia page. GoHuskies9904 (talk) 19:31, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Strong Keep This athletic director is notable. He was also a coach at Cleveand State and that is notable. There are MANY other coaches on wikipedia of the same notability --SportsMaster (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep – Mr. Woodling has established Notability as shown here [1] and here [2]. Is he a Bobby Knight no! However, has gained enough notoriety to have earned a place here at Wikipedia. Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 20:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comentario - I guess you could make a case for anyone mentioned in a newspaper article then. I don't think Cleveland (State) AD comments on something makes him notable. -GoHuskies9904 (talk) 21:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
*Comment – Mentioned just once, no. Mentioned as many times as Mr. Woodling, Yes :-). ShoesssS Talk 02:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - Just because there is an on-campus building named after him that does not make him notable. Many campuses have buildings named after figures who have been important ON CAMPUS but have no notability outside of that. -UWMSports (talk) 22:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable. Mr. Woodling may be recognized on campus (or perhaps not), but I see no support in the article for his notability in the wider world. CRGreathouse (t | c) 19:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - Sentence pertaining to athletic program wouldn't exist without Woodling needs to be removed right away. Rather than get into an edit war with SportsMaster, can a third party tell him that statement is outlandish. I realize he contributed to the sports at Cleveland State, but you're telling me without him they wouldn't have started a sports program in the 50 years since he's been gone. That sentence is ridiculous!!! --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 18:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - It is not rediculous. With Fenn College being a small private school at the time, originally a part of the local YMCA, it is obvious that he was the driving force and the reason for athletics at a collegiate level and taking them from intermurals. Read A History of Fenn College by G. Brooks Earnest. It is all in there. --SportsMaster (talk) 18:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - I'm not disputing his meaning to the college, but its ridiculous to say they wouldn't have sports at their school to this day without Woodling. Not one program? You believe that no one else would have instituted a sports program in the years after he left? Seems a little far fetched. It's like saying if Columbus didn't discover the Western Hemisphere no one else would have found it. Does that make sense? --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 18:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - I changed the wording, you are correct, there would be at Cleveland State, but there would not have been at Fenn College, that much is for certain, since he was the only force driving through difficult times of the depression, WWII, and the problem of co-op eduation and the work schedule they had interfering with the athletic schedules other non co-op colleges faced. Also keep in mind this is a privately funded college, with no public money to help.--SportsMaster (talk) 19:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because page also fails WP:NOTE, original author of both articles created pages. Athletic Directors are not notable:

  • Keep and expand- Woodling, having served as head basketball coach for over 10 seasons and as athletic director for over 30, is clearly notable to the culture and character of Cleveland State University (as evidenced by his induction into that schools hall of fame and the naming of a building for him which was not due to any monetary donations). Most likely, Woodling was therefore notable to the city of Cleveland as a whole. There is no requirement for national notability. See WP:LOCALFAME states that "because a subject is lesser known or even completely unknown outside a given locality does not mean the subject is not notable." Local notability is still nonetheless notability. It would be preferable if this article was expanded to include additional statistics of his coaching records and further citations. CrazyPaco (talk) 19:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Comment on my original comment. My enthusiasm for keeping Woodling's article has been somewhat diminished upon investigation of the status of Fenn College (the predecessor of Cleveland State University). Fenn College does not seem to have been very notable in the world of college athletics prior to being absorbed by Cleveland state in 1965. In fact Robert Busbey (the swimmer in the afd article below which I maintain an opinion of strong keep) seems to be one of its few high points. Woodling's tenure as AD and coach were apparently over by the time CSU absorbed Fenn, although all of Fenn's sports records were officially absorbed into CSU. In fact, CSU wasn't even Division I until 1972. Certainly, Woodling is an important figure in the history of Fenn College, and by its absorption, Cleveland State, but perhaps his most notable achievement was being elected into Cleveland State's Hall of Fame. Because of WP:LOCALFAME and notability guidelines for the College Football wikipedia project (see comment below), and for the sake of completeness, I have maintained my original Keep vote but my enthusiasm has somewhat weakened because of my investigation of the school's status during his tenure which seems to indicate Fenn would not have been though of as having major college (today's D1) sports status. Perhaps that can be cleared up for me if I am incorrect. Certainly, the article on Fenn needs to be clarified in order to avoid confusion of his tenure during Fenn College/CSU years and expanded. There is no CSU basketball media guide available on line to investigate his coaching records, and the information listed for basketball records on wikipedia's Cleveland State Vikings article is incomplete. This needs to be updated.CrazyPaco (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Woodling served as Cleveland State's AD for one year in 1965-1966 school year. They were not division one, it did not exist back then. It used to be University division and College division, and almost as a rule if your schools name ended in College you were in the College Division (todays equivilant to Division II) and if it had University in it, you were in the University Division, with the obvious exceptions being Boston College and similar examples. Another sidenote, the coaching records on the CSU Vikings article is complete for mens basketball. --SportsMaster (talk) 20:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I stand corrected about the wikipedia entry. I was looking at baseball. However, the naming convention for University and College relied a lot less on the schools names than you suggested as there were a ton of exceptions. Membership pretty much followed the lines it does today, although quite a few current mid- or low-major schools, like CSU, have moved up into D1 since. Perusing the NCAA hoops record book, Fenner/CSU didn't even seem to be a prominent DII school. What it does speak to is the level of competition Fenner was playing when Woodling compiled his record (which did not include any winning seasons) which speaks to his notability within the world of college basketball. However, I still think the Woodling article should stay due to the local fame argument, and certainly for thoroughness of articles about prominent CSU athletic figures and coaches.CrazyPaco (talk) 22:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC) I have also added additional comments below regarding the notability guidelines for other college sports wikiprojects which, by extension, would suggest the Woodling is of sufficiently notability.CrazyPaco (talk) 01:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I believe in local fame, but I'd like to know how many people on Cleveland State's campus even know who Woodling or Busbey were? Oh the gym guy or something along those lines is what they'd say. The buildings at my alma mater are named after people too, but those people weren't necessarily notable. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 20:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that someone conduct poll on CSU's campus to ask them who Woodling was to verify his notability? By your criteria, because 99% of University of Pennsylvania undergrads don't know who Louis Kahn was that makes him non-notable? If current students don't know someone that died before they were born, that doesn't mean they are non-notable, otherwise almost any deceased individual once affiliated with a university would fail to qualify under that criteria.CrazyPaco (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

You would be surprised with the students at Cleveland State then. In my opinion. This is also totally conjecture here. --SportsMaster (talk) 20:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep — Former head men's basketball coach at a current NCAA Division I university. I don't know what division Cleveland State was in the 1930s and 1950s, but as a current Division I university, all former head coaches are notable. — X96lee15 (talk) 02:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy, hasty, quick delete - Oswego's gym is called the Max Ziel Gymnasim. Does anyone care? NO... A old fogie from 1937 doesn't have any notability. Specially an athletic director. Just because they make good coin doesn't make them notable. Hell, my accountant makes 115K a year, but he sure aint notable! ----FancyMustard (talk) 07:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Strongest Possible Keep - he's a NCAA Division I men's basketball coach. ALL members of this group are notable. Without question. Older coaches don't always have good Google results, but that's not a notability criteria. matt91486 (talk) 03:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I've struck through the hyperbolic part of my comment as I'm now marginally confused as to CSU's status at the time, but I'm still going with keep. matt91486 (talk) 03:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Fenn College was in the College Division when Woodling was a coach. It is todays equivilant to NCAA Division II. It must also be remembered that it was the highest level of intercollegiate athletics in Cleveland at the time.--SportsMaster (talk) 03:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
D-II? Woodling's notability may be nice at CSU/Fenn College, but I'm sure he was barely known in the sports universe back in the 30s, 40s, 50s. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 04:32, 2 June 2008 (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.


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 Mangojuicetalk 19:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Robert F. Busbey

Robert F. Busbey (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  • Strong Keep This athletic director is notable. He was also a coach at Cleveand State and that is notable. There are MANY other coaches on wikipedia of the same notability. --SportsMaster (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Busbey was not a coach according to the article. -GoHuskies9904 (talk) 20:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Comment - And your point is what? In that you are not in Wikipedia no one should be? I’m sorry if I am coming off as confrontational please excuse me. However, after supplying 3rd part – verifiable – creditable – reliable references and someone give's the reasoning to delete that you just gave. Give me a break. ShoesssS Talk 23:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - My point is just because the man was in the article doesn't make him notable. The sources you provide are just quotes taken from Woodling or Busbey about different events on campus. There's a big difference between an article about a person or just quotes taken from someone. If a reporter covers a car accident lets say they'll get quotes from people who witnessed the event. Those are the types of articles you've provided. --UWMSports (talk) 23:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
See UWMSports Talk Page for respnce. 00:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I think its fairly obvious that the athletic director of a program this size would be notable. DGG (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep — Sufficient notability has been established. Rosiestep (talk) 03:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I ask all of you to name the athletic director of your alma mater without looking it up. -UWMSports (talk) 04:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It is obvious they are notable see List of Division I Athletic Directors--SportsMaster (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Then there needs to be a major expansion on most of these AD articles. Most are one paragraph. If every AD is notable, then every college president/dean should have his/her own article too. Where does the line go to? --UWMSports (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I think a much stronger case could be made for the notability of most college presidents than for that of ADs, coaches, etc., who are non-entities outside the sports fan realm. (This may seem odd to some; but then, I couldn't name a single coach or the AD for UWM, and I'm on campus almost every day.) --Orange Mike | Talk 18:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC) (yeah, that Orange Mike; say "Hi!" sometime)
Thank You Orange! Being an AD is a great job, but it is not a position notable of being included in an encyclopedia. Even most college sports fans can't name their AD. It is a behind the scenes job! --UWMSports (talk) 19:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I beg to differ. I would wager that if you go to any sports message board (Scout.com or Rivals.com) of a major university (BCS conference schools), 95% of the posters on those boards would absolutely know who the athletic director at their favorite school is. Myself, I can name most of the athletic directors in the Big East Conference off the top of my head along with most of the athletic directors at my alma mater over the last 50 years (that's right, well before I was born). Are all ADs notable? No, I don't think so. However, today's ADs at major schools are akin to CEOs of multimillion dollar cooperations and the position is a highly sought after and visible academic and athletic administrative position, especially at major schools. ADs are very familiar to schools athletic fan bases. When they have a substantial impact at a university, yes, I do think they are notable. I do think due to the tenure and impact Woodling and Busbey had at CSU, they are notable athletic administrators within the world of college athletics, and especially locally.CrazyPaco (talk) 20:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable. Busbey is, if anything, less notable than Woodling. CRGreathouse (t | c) 14:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Busbey was notable enough for Dennis Kucinich to honor him in congress. I think that should be good enough for everyone. --SportsMaster (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
So what? My best friend was roommates with Steve Levy in college. Does that my my friend notable? NO --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 23:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
That has nothing at all to do with him being honored IN CONGRESS.--SportsMaster (talk) 23:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, no, it isn't. One of the things congresscritters do (left, right, or centrist) is to pad the Congressional Record with tributes to constituents, often taken from the constituents' own PR flack; it's cheap and builds goodwill. I was reading the CR when I was a teenager, and the dreary procession of these things, killing trees nationwide to flatter somebody and their fans, always did depress me. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Are you voting for deletion then, Orangemike? --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm color-blind in that range; most jocks, coaches, etc. are non-notables in my mind, along with most serial killers, Pokemon, "reality" show hosts (much less contestants), porn stars, etc. So I'm simply commenting, not "voting"! --Orange Mike | Talk 19:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
"HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1999

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Robert F. Busbey and in recognition of Cleveland State University naming their natatorium the Robert F. Busbey Natatorium on October 2, 1999. I am honored to have been invited to this dedication ceremony.

Beginning with his enrollment in 1946 to Fenn College, later Cleveland State University, Robert F. ``Bob Busbey has contributed more to the history of Cleveland State athletics than any other single individual. As a four-sport athlete (swimming, baseball, track, and fencing), he was Fenn College's first All-American and achieved this honor in both 1948 and 1949.

After graduation, Mr. Busbey served as the head swimming coach at Cleveland State for 30 years. During his coaching tenure, Mr. Busbey was named the assistant swimming coach for the 1964 U.S. Olympic Team, served as chairman of the NCAA Swimming Committee, served as Cleveland State's athletics director, and was responsible for bringing five NCAA swimming championships to the Cleveland State natatorium.

Robert Busbey's accomplishments led to his receiving the 1982 National Collegiate and Scholastic Swimming Trophy, one of the sport's highest awards. Mr. Busbey served as the athletic director until 1990, developing a program of 18 intercollegiate sports and was a prime force in the planning and building of CSU's Physical Education Building, housing the world class natatorium. After serving as Cleveland State's Director of Athletics, Mr. Busbey served as the associate vice president for athletic affairs until his retirement in 1994. In recognition of his outstanding athletic legacy and generous support, Cleveland State University is honoring him by naming the natatorium the Robert F. Busbey Natatorium.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Mr. Busbey on his many accomplishments and commemorate him for his continuous support of Cleveland State University. "

I would say he is notable after the words "has contributed more to the history of Cleveland State athletics than any other single individual." --SportsMaster (talk) 19:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Nope. That's not from a reliable source; it's from a puff piece inserted into the Congressional Record, probably at the request of the CSU Athletic Department flacks. (See my remarks above.) --Orange Mike | Talk 19:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It is the congressional record of the United States of America. I would have to disagree that it is not a reliable source. I do understand your point from a public relations standpoint though. --SportsMaster (talk) 20:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep and expand- Busbey is clearly notable because of his athletic achievements and contributions to the sport of swimming. Besides being able to use the same argument above; that is WP:LOCALFAME "because a subject is lesser known or even completely unknown outside a given locality does not mean the subject is not notable." Clearly Busbey is notable within Cleveland due to his contributions to the school and without due to his overall contributions to the sport of swimming. Busbey was an All-American swimmer, chair of the NCAA Swimming Committee, and U.S. Olympic assistant swimming coach, and NCSW Trophy winner and 30 year head coach of Cleveland State's swimming team who guided them to several NCAA championships. This is in itself is highly notable in the world of athletics. As above, this article needs to be expanded to include additional statistics of his coaching records and many accomplishments.CrazyPaco (talk) 20:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - See: SportsMaster's Contributions; Scroll to the bottom where the run of contribs to other userpage's begin. Not sure if this is legal or not by Wikipedia standards, but he is clearly trying to manipulate the vote. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - This speaks to Wikipedia:Canvassing. There is nothing wrong with notifying others that may have interest in the topic that an article is up for deletion. SportsMaster clearly maintained neutrality, which is clearly the message I received. That doesn't impact the central question of whether these articles are notable. AFD is not a vote. To be clear on this, I have no interest in Cleveland State or previous interaction with SportsMaster (at least that I am aware of), not that it is a pertinent issue. In this case, Busbey is clearly notable in the world of college swimming (having received several of its highest honors) and his article should be included in wikipedia based on that fact alone. His contributions to CSU make him notable locally.CrazyPaco (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Glad you brought this up because it is totally legal, and I am in no way swaying the vote. Have a nice day Huskies. --SportsMaster (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It's fishy, because I've noticed you've reported other users who you think try to get their friends to vote as well. Just trying to be fair here. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 20:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The key here is that I do not know these people, nor are they sharing the same IP address as me as was the case before in the case of the user who I reported, legitimatly mind you.--SportsMaster (talk) 20:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

So what? It is still trying to rig a vote. I'm just interested to hear what a third party thinks about this. If its kosher by them, then alright. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not trying to rig the vote at all. If you would read what I left them on their talk pages you would see I didn't sway one way or the other. --SportsMaster (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment - I believe I can say that I am an independent third party both to this Afd, in that I know nothing about either individual nominated at this particular Afd and have had no interaction with regards to SportsMaster before this Afd. To put it as simply as possible, what SportsMaster did is very acceptable here at Wikipedia. In fact I would go so far as to say, it is encouraged in situations like this and along with the waySportsMaster phrased his request. I reviewed the messages SportsMaster left on the other editors talk page and what he said verbatim is: “…The following articles Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homer E. Woodling were nominated for deletion. You are welcome to share your opinion on if they should be deleted or not. Thank you for your time.” He did not express his own opinion nor did he try to influence a particular opinion from these editors. Honestly, I have done the same thing a few times where I wanted other editors I respected and trusted to voice their honest opinions, just to make sure I was on the right logic track. Where Canvassing is frowned upon, here at Wikipedia is when you are looking for specific responses or trying to influence an editors response. However, in situations where you are only asking for an unbiased opinion on your thought process is perfectly acceptable. The other thing to remember, here at Wikipedia, is that the Afd is just a process to gather consensus, not a vote. The closing administrator of this Afd is not going OK we have 15 Keep votes and 14 Delete votes, therefore it is a Keep or vise versa. Rather the administrator looks to the reasons why an editor expressed a keep or delete opinion and weights the validity of that opinion. In fact, I have seen Afd’s on both sides of the fence be closed for the minority opinion, rather than the majority. So always remember, when involved in these types of situations, give a reasoning why you expressed a Keep or Delete – Support or Oppose. It goes a lot further than the individual who responds with “…per nominator”. One final though! Always assume Good Faith. In other circumstances or another time, you would have received a warning from me for even broaching the subject in this setting. Fair enough. ShoesssS Talk 01:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
According to Orangemike it is a no-no; Scroll down to bottom. Shoes, I assume good faith where ever possible, but Master reported another user for getting someone to vote in an AfD. So if he wants a fair playing field and not having a user try and influence a vote, then he shouldn't do it either. I'm not going to report SM, but I'm just trying to be fair on all sides. I will definitely recognize the admin's final decision here, but lets let people decide for themselves. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 02:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Shoessssssss has a point here; the language quoted is not out of line. As I have mentioned, this subject matter is an area of massive indifference to me. The out-of-line part was the impression I was given, that he was messaging people with an interest in CSU (thus possibly lacking an NPOV), rather those with expertise in sports. If that is not the case, then we should indeed AGF. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It is amazing how you left out the part that the person who I reported HAD THE SAME ISP as the other user. Thank you once again for your concern. --SportsMaster (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

What he did was wrong, but if you're reporting anyone for any kind of vote manipulation its pretty low that you would be doing it too. Can we agree to let the vote be done in a fair manner? --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 03:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Cool it, guys! --Orange Mike | Talk 03:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I just read the guidelines. I did nothing wrong. Wikipedia:Canvassing. You are right, it should and IS being done in a fair manner and I am not doing any kind of voting manipulation. I find your attempt to find fault in my actions (deleting comments from MY OWN talk page and the afore mention non problem) petty and totally uncalled for. You should also stand by your own word "So what? It is still trying to rig a vote. I'm just interested to hear what a third party thinks about this. If its kosher by them, then alright." A third party did give their input, and you still can't accept it.--SportsMaster (talk) 03:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I did, and Orangemike told me it was a no-no, I went to someone you didn't leave a message with. I'm willing to let it go if you don't do it again. Can we move on? --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 03:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I did NOTHING wrong, and I will do it again because I have done nothing wrong. I also didn't ever write on Shoessss talk page. Once again I find your excuses petty, annoying and a complete waste of everyones time. --SportsMaster (talk) 03:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It's just shady you would do that after complaining about someone else doing it. I'm sorry, I was just concerned. You may or may not have done something wrong, but you should understand why it would bug me when you report people for every little thing that doesn't go your way. That's all I'm saying. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 03:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong in what Master did. Your concerns are appreciated GoHuskies, but you can let this go. --UWMSports (talk) 03:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
UWM, Huskies has a great point though. If Josh is going to report anyone who disagrees he should be called out when he does something less than honorable. Heck, Master better be a saint if he reports anyone under the sun. He is a loser!!! --FancyMustard (talk) 07:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep — Being the coach for 5 NCAA swimming championships makes Busbey notable. I still think there would be athletics at CSU if Buseby was never there though. — X96lee15 (talk) 02:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment-upon further review of the NCAA record books, CSU never won any championships. Busbey was responsible for CSU hosting 4 NCAA D1 Swimming and Diving championships and 1 DII championships. The wording of the congressional record is confusing.CrazyPaco (talk) 16:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy, hasty, quick delete - Oswego's gym is called the Max Ziel Gymnasim. Does anyone care? NO... A old fogie from 1937 doesn't have any notability. Specially an athletic director. Just because they make good coin doesn't make them notable. Hell, my accountant makes 115K a year, but he sure aint notable! ----FancyMustard (talk) 07:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment- first off, what is Oswego? It certainly isn't a NCAA Division 1 university. Being an "old fogie" does not disqualify Jim Thorpe or Babe Ruth from notability. Why again is an athletic director not notable? Because your accountant makes six figures? ADs notability has nothing to do with their salary, which is not as extravagant as you think. Besides, Busbey is more notable for his contributions to the sport of swimming than anything else.CrazyPaco (talk) 16:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - Mustard chose a poor choice of words there, but Paco, neither of these men are Babe Ruth or Jim Thorpe. Any Tom, Dick or Harry knows who Babe Ruth was, and any sports fan knows who Jim Thorpe was. I guarentee about one and twenty million sports fans knew who Busbey or Woodling were. Athletic directors simply aren't notable unless its a Craig Littlepage or someone who has taken a step out of the office. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 02:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
First of all, Woodling and Busbey should not be discussed together. These articles each have merits that should be discussed separately. Secondly, when did I ever compare Busbey to Jim Thorpe and Babe Ruth? I was showing how poor Mustard's line or reasoning was regarding diminished notability due to age. There is no basis to suggest that because someone left their mark prior to 2003 (in this case late 40s though 80s) that it somehow reduces their notability. There are 10,000s of "old fogies" in wikipedia. And finally, I just completely disagree with you. ADs at BCS schools can absolutely be notable and are often highly visible. I don't know how closely you follow college athletics, but AD often are quite visible in the media. That said, I've never contributed to an AD article before, I don't have any vested interest in CSU. Does Busbey deserve and article because of his AD status, that's a valid debate, because CSU is not one of the top echelon universities, however because of the length of his tenure, his role in moving CSU to Division 1, and his role in the 1980s basketball scandal makes for the possibility of an interesting article. However, in my opinion, due to his contributions to the world of swimming, there is no doubt that he passes any test of notability.CrazyPaco (talk) 15:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment - Comparing Robert Busbey to George Herman "Babe" Ruth? Seriously? And I agree with UConn guy, ADs sit in offices and make schedules and such. They aren't the ones in the PUBLIC EYE like the players and coaches. ADs are relatively unknown. Even the Littlepage page Huskies provided is in bad shape. And Oswego has provided more to the sports universe than Cleveland State. CSU may be D-I, but anyone with a brain knows there is huge gap between the top D-I schools and the bottom of the barrel D-I schools. --FancyMustard (talk) 05:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
What is also laughable is Comparing Division III Oswego's Ziel gym to the Div 1 Busbey Natatorium that has hosted 4 Div 1 Men's NCAA National Championships (that alone makes Busbey natatorium notable on its own). CSU is a Div 1 school that has had All-American's, sent players to the NBA, has one of the all-time NCAA steals leaders, has placed its sports in various D1 championships, and is one of the top programs in the Horizon League. To compare Division III SUNY Oswego athletic programs to Cleveland State's is as ridiculous as comparing Busbey to Babe Ruth, unless you want to make the argument that within their own scope DIII schools' accomplishments are just as notable as DI schools' accomplishments. In that case, the overall level of play doesn't matter so much and that improves the notability arguments for a D1 mid-major associated individuals, such as those tied to CSU, within their own scope. Seriously, the Busbey is completely notable as a swimmer, swimming coach, and swimming administrator. His AD status is not the sole issue here. That argument belongs with the other afd nomination which should be discussed separately.CrazyPaco (talk) 15:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment- Yeah, Mustard is a bit biased, so I agree his comparsion is pretty far fetched, but unlike Ruth to Busbey, he isn't comparing American Hero to an AD at a small D-I school. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough, but again, what really impresses me is Busbey's role in the sport of swimming. I know I keep emphasizing that even though it wasn't a major component of how the article originally read but his role in the sport of swimming is highly notable in my opinion. I don't want to get into something that reflects a flawed "because it exists" argument, but compared to the 1000s of articles on obscure European soccer players and articles about everyone who played even less than one season for a MLB team, clearly Buseby was much more important in shaping his sport than those individuals. He was an Olympic coach and a member of the NCAA swimming rules committee for something like 12 years. Those are not trivial positions, and this does not even speak to his accomplishments while competing or coaching at CSU. If Busbey was never an AD, I don't think it would detract from his notability at all to tell you the truth. However, his years as AD simply adds to his resume of accomplishments, but arguing against his notability because he is "just an AD" I think at this point, really misses the mark. I really think Woodling and Busbey debates should be addressed separately for the reason that they bring very different sets of accomplishments. In any case, I can't believe I've spent this much time on articles on either of these two men. I must really like procrastinating.CrazyPaco (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment- I have updated the Busbey article to include some of his achievements in the world of swimming. The Swimming World magazine article on his death indicates that he was a 5X diving national champion as well. This was not at the collegiate level (as evidenced by the NCAA records books) and I can find no records on the internet as to what level this was in (AAU?). This info should be researched and added to his article. The dates and events he achieved All-American status should also be added to the article, as should his coaching records. As AD, he also presided over a scandal involving the basketball team in the 1980s involving Manute Bol, which resulted in NCAA sanctions against CSU. In fact, the CSU athletic department was accused of supplying the NCAA with misleading information when investigating this case. This man was clearly notable in the world of college athletics and swimming. In my opinion, this article would have never been brought to AFD if the man had been researched more carefully.CrazyPaco (talk) 16:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Just because someone's Wikipedia page is #1 on a google search doesnt mean they are not notable. Otherwise, national champion coaches including Billy Donovan and Roy Williams would fail WP:N. Being a NCAA Division I basketball coach and an athletic director alone makes Woodling notable. Frank Anchor Talk to me (R-OH) 04:28, 4 June 2008 (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.