Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Whelan
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 by consensus. He wasn't traded for Sheffield – he was part of a package that the Tigers sent to the Yankees _for_ Sheffield. On top of that, he hasn't pitched above AA and just made it to AA this year. If he makes it to the bigs, the article can come back, but he's not notable right now. - KrakatoaKatie 09:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Kevin Whelan
Non-notable minor league baseball player, has not played in the major leagues. Fails WP:BASEBALL guidelines. Corvus cornix 22:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Sorry Kevin - your mom loves you, but you are not notable in a Wiki-kinda way. MarkBul 00:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep and Close. WP:BASEBALL is not a policy. WP:BIO asserts notability if a player plays in a fully professional league. Minor League Baseball is a fully professional (not semi-professional or amateur) league. It's pretty cut and dry. Smashville 20:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete WP:BASEBALL is not a policy, but i is a guideline we can follow. I don't think the minors convey sufficient notability. As to Wikipedia:Speedy keep, not applicable. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 23:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- WP:BIO specifically says "Competitors who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming or tennis". It doesn't say anything about major and minor leaguers. In addition, he was traded for Gary Sheffield. Although I will admit that this looks like it was written by his mom. Smashville 23:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- WP:BIO isn't a policy, either. Why not argue that just being an athlete is notable? why is WP:BASEBALL any less authoratative than WP:BIO or WP:MUSIC, for that matter? Corvus cornix 15:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- Just as BIO supersedes the general WP:N when it is applicable, so do the guidelines for particular sports supersede the general specification. Maybe this specific rule should be changed. In that case, try to change it..DGG (talk) 23:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm completely in support of WP:BASEBALL's guideline. The MLB draft each year has 50 rounds, with 30 teams picking in each round. Combine that with all the sandwich picks etc and there is a lot of "new blood" into the system each year. Since roster sizes are set, these players are taking the place of somebody else and I do not think we need to make 1500+ new article for each player selected to be a professional Corpx 17:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per Corpx. --Bfigura (talk) 20:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy keep He is of significant note in Texas A&M Athletics History, esp in Baseball. While the current article does not make this distinction and can certainly be improved, I see no reason to delete it. In addition, the minor leagues are certainly professional sports. — BQZip01 — talk 02:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Can you explain why he was significant in Texas A&M history, he seems to me like a non-notable minor league set-up man to me, only award he got was from a Summer League which is not proffesional, WP:BASEBALL is not policy, WP:N is Delete Jaranda wat's sup Sports! 02:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Let me clarify my position. Delete unless he has notable achievements while at TAMU, as I'm opposed to keep minor leagues just because they're minor leaguers. Corpx 03:55, 3 September 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.
