Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Munyan

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 delete. --Coredesat 01:26, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keith Munyan

Keith Munyan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Subject is not notable per WP:BIO. Originally listed for PROD, but the article's author challenged. Mwelch 01:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. Claims to notability would seem to be limited to being a long-time successful high school football coach and to being elected to the sports hall of fame of Louisiana College, the small college from which he graduated. Doesn't meet WP:BIO guidelines. Mwelch 01:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom non notable.--Paloma Walker 01:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - I'm an inclusionist. - Richard Cavell 01:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - School coaches are not notable Alex Bakharev 02:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per given arguments. Icemuon 13:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. High school coach. Herostratus 17:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete High school coach, not notable. NawlinWiki 17:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails WP:BIO. A Traintake the 21:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable enough per WP:BIO. Just a local coach. --Seattle Skier (talk) 00:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable, though the Louisiana H.S. HOF makes it close. The author has a habit of creating articles about lots of "local legends." Realkyhick 03:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. Just to be clear: he didn't make a HOF that represents the whole state of Louisiana. He attended a 1,000-student college named "Louisiana College". And he made that school's sports HOF. My high school was bigger than that, so I hope we're not saying everybody in their sports HOF (sadly, not including me) is near notable!  ;-) Mwelch 03:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Notability rules: Athletes: 1)Competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming and tennis 2)Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports. 3)Competitors in college sports in the United States. It says nothing about the size of the college. So a college hall of fame does suffice. Billy Hathorn 23:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment. I'd respectfully disagree. The notability guidelines you quote are intended to be (as the name indicates) guidelines to help one determine who is likely to have "a good deal of verifiable information available about them and a good deal of public interest in them". As a general guideline, yes, there is a good deal of public interest and information about American college sports athletes. In the specific instance of athletes from Louisiana College in the 1950's, however, with all due respect to what I'm sure is a fine institution, no, I don't think there's much public interest or info about their athletes from that time. I could be wrong, though. If I am, feel free to cite the independent secondary sources which confirm this great interest. Currently, the article has none. Mwelch 23:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Billy, you have raised an interesting technical point. I don't think the intent was to literally include all possible colleges, and we'll have to find a more exact way to say so. The item is parallel to "fully professional league" and to "highest level"; the obvious meaning is major college sports--I think it would mean NCAA Division I, and Louisiana College is in division III. For High school coaches, I don't know what would be sufficient--maybe president of the state association? But I agree with MWelch-- any possible notability would come from that, not the college.
But in any case , the only RS you have is the College Hall of Fame record-- The others are a letter to you from his widow and his son, and a general reference to roots.com, from which it is possible to confirm that he is in their database--but what information they may have, I don't know for you didn't say. It would be justified with such dubious sourcing to ask you to document every fact in the article, for if it is kept, everything unsourced should be removed. And also everything unimportant. Not all parts of his life will be equally noteworthy.
Delete . DGG 03:13, 29 March 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.