Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph St. Pierre

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. Rjd0060 (talk) 21:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph St. Pierre

Joseph St. Pierre (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Chess player with questionable notability. It appears he may be locally notable in student organizations, but doesn't seem to have any impact on the game nationally or internationally. Also the Bowdoin Brief reference seems to contradict assertion that he's a current champion. Dougie WII (talk) 00:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Neither source appears to be secondary. So nothing to establish notability. SunCreator (talk) 00:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Neutral I'm not sure if the chess championships would be notable or not. He has received some news coverage for it, see the g-hits. Article creator is an SPA, though, making me think it's an autobio. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 05:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Rechecked the g-hits.

Not notable in my view. What shows up are sites that not really independent. A college article of which no doubt he is a pupil, a chess association of which he is a member. A blog report copied from the college report.

There will be local chess champions of every major population and region over much of the world. I don't think that makes any of them notable. Also qxh7 blog reports his name under the section entitled 'Maine Closed Champions'. And closed in chess normally means restricted so the best players can't take part. SunCreator (talk) 12:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

"And closed in chess normally means restricted so the best players can't take part." — Nope, exactly backwards. Closed does mean restricted—limited to the best players. Open means anyone can play, so open events are generally weaker. Compare U.S. Chess Championship and U.S. Open Chess Championship. The Open is a much larger event, but only the winner of the closed event is the official U.S. Champion. That said, state chess champions are generally not encyclopedically notable. Quale (talk) 16:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment Closed events restricted to the best are not often (if indeed ever) called 'Closed' because it conveys an incorrect meaning. The example given U.S. Chess Championship, being such a case, it's not called the U.S. Closed Chess Championship. Closed is used for some local and club level competitions when the tournament is closed to people in that town/city/region or membership of a particular chess club. SunCreator (talk) 13:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

• Delete A weak player (weaker than a good number of participants of the WP:WikiProject Chess !), and the Maine chess championship is not strong enough to confer notability to the winner. So no notability. [by SyG]

Comment - And not even the Maine open chess championship but the Maine closed chess championship. SunCreator (talk) 12:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know anything about chess championships, scores, etc., that's why I didn't want to try to make a determination. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 18:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

See above. SunCreator has a misconception about the nature of closed and open events in this context, although ultimately I don't think it makes a difference as state chess championships are not normally notable whether closed or open. Quale (talk) 16:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Delete. Article was deleted under CSD before as Joe St. Pierre. Recreated a deleted article. Check the creator's talk page. Article that was deleted was a redirect page, sorry. Still non-notable. Voyaging^(talk) 16:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:25, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - not notable enough. Bubba73 (talk), 13:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as fails WP:N; no significant coverage.Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:36, 18 April 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.