Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Offerdahl

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. Spebi 06:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Offerdahl

Mark Offerdahl (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Procedural nom. I declined a speedy request, as it seems that the article does assert some significance. The editor who requested the speedy deletion contacted me on my talk page to explain why they felt the subject fails to meet notability (apparently, the athlete in question is a minor-leaguer). Due to my ignorance of Australian rugby, I will defer to the other editor and accept that this person probably fails WP:BIO, though I think AfD is still the way to go here, as speedy deletion really should be reserved for the most obvious cases. faithless (^speak) 07:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Canley (talk) 14:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Has not played any first grade games and even though he appears to be in the Sea Eagles Jersey Flegg Team which is a lower grade. Firelement85 (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. Whilst I cannot easily locate the Policy, my understanding is that team sport athletes are notable if they have played at least one game in the top grade in their league. The Jersey Flegg is a junior (under 20s) league. -Sticks66 (talk) 01:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• KEEP - added to article. He is a highly rated squad member. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 01:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment That he played with notable players in under 17's does not make him notable, nowhere in the article does it say that he is a highly rated squad member and I find that hard to believe if we are talking about the first grade team.Firelement85 (talk) 05:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment Citing an article predicting success is WP:NOT#CRYSTAL. Plus, the prediction was incorrect - for 2007, at least. •Florrie•leave a note• 06:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• DELETE - has not played one first-grade game although he has been available in the pool for two years. Wait until he gets there, then start the article. (Note- I previously added the db-bio which prompted this discussion.) •Florrie•leave a note• 06:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:BIO. Playing at the lower levels of a sport hardly makes one noteworthy, even if signed to a major club. Mostlyharmless (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

KEEP - He has an infobox, he's in Manly's squad, NRL.com have him and they don't include a whole raft of 'juniors'. I'd keep him around.Londo06 (talk) 19:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment Any player who has ever stepped on a park could write themselves an infobox - it doesn't prove notability. Offerdahl might be listed in the Manly squad (and has been for 12 months) - but has not played one game - many listed in the top 25 never do play at NRL level. He may have a page at NRL.com but it is empty of any playing stats because, so far, there is nothing to record. Where is the harm in waiting for a few months and making up the article when he runs on in an NRL jersey and meets notability? •Florrie•leave a note• 21:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Suggestion. If it's ok, I'd like to add Rodney Davies to this AfD, as the issues are essentially the same - he's also an Australian footballer who's been signed by a club, but as of yet never played an NRL game (according to Florrie - I admit to having zero NRL knowledge) Mostlyharmless (talk) 22:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Agree That article should be deleted as well. It is essentially the same though from what I can tell he has more potential, but you can have all the potential in the world it doesn't make a difference to Wikipedia, Wikipedia:BIO#Athletes clearly states that an athlete must have played in a fully professional league of their sport to be notable.Firelement85 (talk) 01:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

• Can't say I've heard of him, but with the amount of interest in the page, and the debate he seems to have caused, an infobox being created, people editing the infobox, etc he seems to be a player that people want to spend their time on. KEEP CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 01:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment What makes people think having an infobox in the article is at all relevant? faithless (^speak) 01:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, player is yet to make a first-grade appearance, so not notable. Lankiveil ^{(complaints | disco)} 23:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC).
• Delete until he plays a game of first grade. The source for the article refers to his potential. Capitalistroadster (talk) 23:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - We should not speculate about whether this guy will make an appearance for a pro team. What if he was caught in a car accident tomorrow and never walked again? Would he still be notable? No, of course he wouldn't. This should be deleted, with the provision for recreation once he plays a game. – PeeJay 17:45, 21 January 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.