Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jimmy Clausen

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. The most substantial argument in favor of keeping now is Greg Oden precedent; WP:NBD specifies that precedent should given only light consideration in xfD fora. Meanwhile, WP:BIO failure (and WP:V, considering the article's single source) remains essentially unchallenged in the discussion. Xoloz 19:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jimmy Clausen

nn-bio; High school athlete; see Matthew Stafford AfD which resulted in deletion -- TexasDawg 13:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. WP:BIO not notable.... yet?? Ohconfucius 13:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete high school athlete. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Has warranted numerous stories from national media; recognized by millions of American football fans. TexasDawg 14:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable yet. Once a known name in college football, then article will be warranted.--NMajdan•talk 14:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. Why did the person who nominated this for deletion vote to keep it? -- Merope 14:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Just wanted to open up the discussion. TexasDawg 14:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Hype in and of itself is not particularly noteworthy. Hadnot 14:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.102.176 (talk • contribs)
• Delete, high school athletes aren't notable; recreate when/if he does something noteworthy in college. NawlinWiki 20:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep That is a blanket statement, and certainly isn't applicable in all situations. Was Lebron James not notable when he was in high school? Clausen has made himself a controversial figure due to the nature of his commitment, and therefore is noteworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.116.63 (talk • contribs)

• Keep. Hype schmype. Greg Oden, the top-ranked basketball player in the United States in the high school class of 2006, first had his article on Wikipedia over a year before he graduated. Clausen is the top-ranked football player in the class of '07 and is now less than a year from graduation. Besides, why delete an article that will only inevitably be recreated in a year's time? Raggaga 02:32, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• Besides, why delete an article that will only inevitably be recreated in a year's time?
  This was the argument I and many others made during the debate over the Matthew Stafford article, but it was shot down. There are a lot of WikiNerds that know nothing about college football and therefore don't understand how high school athletes can be known by millions of fans before they're even in college. -- TexasDawg 12:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. To be concise, that's a classic crystal ball argument. --Lazybum 02:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• nothing is inevitable. delete. Ohconfucius 09:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete non-notable and an argument based on inevitability is a logical fallacy. Eusebeus 10:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

That was only part of his argument. What about precedent? StarryEyes 17:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per Raggaga (the precedent argument, not the inevitability one). See also this year's top basketball prospect, OJ Mayo. StarryEyes 17:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
• keep If it's good enought for the Mayo then it good enough for the pickle boy. 205.157.110.11 00:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable. Any claim that he'll eventually become famous is a crystal ball argument. (There have been so many cases of high-school blue chips with disappointing college career.) --Lazybum 02:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Famous high school prospect. Subject of major profile in SI [1] and other major media. --JJay 02:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• keep please person is subject of major media not nn Yuckfoo 17:18, 15 August 2006 (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.