Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Stafford

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 of the debate was 'delete (2 keep, 5 delete, discounting socks). As awesome as college recruits are, wait until he's recieved the Heisman or broke a college record before reposting. -Mysekurity(have you seen this?) 04:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Matthew Stafford

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}
  • Keep This page should not be deleted because Stafford is one of the top high school football recruits in the country. He is known by hundreds of thousands of high school and college football fans around the country. [1] TexasDawg 22:35, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm a little confused, TexasDawg. Aren't you the one who put the AfD template there? Why are you asking it to be not deleted then? Enochlau 22:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Because it has been unnecessarily deleted several times. (I've only submitted it once.) I was advised to add the AfD here. TexasDawg 22:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

OK. Enochlau 23:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete are semi-professionals notable? --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 00:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Smart move. Because you clearly don't have much of an argument here. All you can do is point out that certain people who have made very good arguments for keeping the entry do not have many other edits. TexasDawg 19:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
My initial comment was a weak delete, suggesting that I prepared to be convinced that the article shouldn't be deleted. It was not a 'smart move' it was simply the right thing to do considering the eveidence presented after I made my inital comment. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-- There are all kinds of famous amateur and collegiate athletes with entries at Wikipedia, JiFish. Stafford is widely and increasingly known by high school and college football fans. TexasDawg 00:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Stafford is pretty famous already as the #1 high school quarterback in the country. Hundreds of thousands of college football fans know who this kid is. 24.99.52.214 00:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
    • (The above note it that user's only contribution) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 01:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Matthew Stafford is known by hundreds of thousands of people. In the past week he has been the subject of newspaper articles in the Dallas Morning News, the Atlanta Journal Constitution, and the Athens Banner-Herald. In addition, over the last year he has been profiled by every college football recruiting service and been the subject of hundreds of articles on those websites and publications. If you think Stafford is an unremarkable person because the world of high school football recruiting is limited, I would suggest you browse ESPN's website and read the synopsis and reports they provide on Matt Stafford that bare striking resemblance to the articles they author on professional athletes. 24.131.5.142 01:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
    • (The above note it that user's only contribution) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 01:42, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, I know shit about football except for the little bit from high school. Great times, and excellent times from high school. Often, the notability isn't so grand for these type of athletes. However, this may be a different case, perhaps unprecendent. I have briefly overlooked the matter and it is my understanding that most of the information in the article is truthfull. Some of it specially the last sentences may not be as verifiable, however that still doesn't solve our problem. Is a high school notable enough? According to wiki guideline, WP:BIO it is proper to have a bio for:
Sportspeople who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in an individual professional sport, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports, including college sports in the United States. Articles about first team squad members who have not made a first team appearance may also be appropriate, but only if the individual is at a club of sufficient stature that most members of its squad already have articles.
Can we consider "High school," as part of the highest level in mainly amateur sports? I would imagine the bar is pretty high, (higher than Canadian High School football), however I'm not convinced that it is the highest level of amateur sports football. Perhaps, a quick blurb on the "High school football" would be appropriate and may help this article for better acceptance. Perhaps, simply, merging the information onto the school's article would be even better. Again, we need to konw if the high school is notable enough to be compared to college or professional football? For now, delete. and add the info to the school's article. --CylePat 01:57, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
    • comment Probably you meant WP:BIO instead of WP:PRO. You might want to take a look at the WP:BIO#Alternative tests. I wonder if this has been written by the subject or someone closely involved with the subject? (Autobiography)... and the other test, should be adhered too. --131.137.245.200 16:59, 14 December 2005
Should Vince Young, Brady Quinn, D.J. Shockley, Marcus Vick, and several other college football quarterbacks also have their Wikipedia entries deleted? TexasDawg 18:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep He's the #1 recruit in the nation, and will cross over the notability line-in-the-sand this August when he enrolls at Georgia. The info here is plenty verifiable and I don't think it justifies creation en masse of high-school athletecruft. (ESkog)(Talk) 02:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
He is enrolling at Georgia in 2 weeks. TexasDawg 02:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the clarification. (ESkog)(Talk) 20:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep It seems to me that the language (Sportspeople who have played in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in an individual professional sport, or at the highest level in mainly amateur sports, including college sports in the United States. Articles about first team squad members who have not made a first team appearance may also be appropriate, but only if the individual is at a club of sufficient stature that most members of its squad already have articles. ) concerning the inclusion of athletes in Wikipedia was written with the ultimate goal of keeping "unremarkable" athletes from being listed. The diction chosen provides a necessary leniency for athletes because it is difficult to determine a set of qualifications that would work for every country. The best rough comparisons of Matthew Stafford's remarkableness and stature would be to say that he is the best under the age of 18(henceforth U18) Amercian football player in the world. This honor would be roughly the equivalent of being the best U18 soccer player in Europe. The only difference is that due to the American football system, Stafford does not have the opportunity to play professionally at this point. This does not make him unremarkable, however, when one considers the aforementioned media attention he receives. Furthermore, whether you like the sport or not, the spread of American football through avenues such as NFL Europe and the leagues forming in Japan associated with the yearly NFL preseason game played there indicate more than just a passing appreciation of the remarkable abilities of a player of Stafford's stature. Finally, it seems somewhat settled that once he is officially enrolled at the University of Georgia that his inclusion in Wikipedia will not be at issue. The question then shifts to how his notoriety or remarkableness will change, when he enrolls in the first week of January, to make him worthy of being included in Wikipedia. The answer is that it will not. He will still be the ludicrously talented and widely known Matthew Stafford and will still receive coverage from the same national newspapers and sports media outlets as he does now. 24.131.2.1 04:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
    • (The above comment is that users 2nd contribution. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 14:44, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - waste of time to delete an entry that will be reconsitututed in a month or two when he becomes over-the-line famous. --SockpuppetSamuelson 11:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - I agree with S.S. above. Whether he's the next John Elway or a bust, Stafford will be a closely followed player at one of the top college football programs in the state of Georgia. TexasDawg may have slightly jumped the gun under the wikipedia policy, but as the top-rated quarterback prospect in the country, Stafford is and certainly will be deserving of an entry. Hadnot 18:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
    • (The above comment is that user's only edit.) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 19:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
--What is your point? TexasDawg 19:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
It's pretty standard to point out if people contributing to AfD discusuions have no editing history. This is to inform the user that closes the debate that the commentor may possibly not be a wikipedian, or that a single user may be commenting multiple times. This isn't to say that it will be discounted, but generally comments of this nature are given less weight than comments from long time users. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP IT!!!

Matthew Stafford is the most important figure in a popular Texas high school football sub-culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.117.146.2 (talk • contribs)

  • Keep this page please. He may be a future heisman trophy candidate and far surpasses any other college recruit. He is entering a strong program with a lot of momentum. He is a player to watch —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlewhit (talk • contribs)
  • Delete Whatever he may be in the future, right now he's a dime-a-dozen high school (not even college yet!) quarterback. Note that WP:BIO specifically covers sporting personalities, wioth reference to having played in the senior professional leagues. Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 14:50, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Dime-a-dozen? That's pretty funny. He's the #1 recruit in the country. TexasDawg 01:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete sock overflow.  Grue  21:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn-bio, influenced by the pile of sockpuppets and unsigned. Stifle 23:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I don't mean to be rude, but all the deletes on this page are from non-Americans who likely have very little understanding of American college football or the college football recruiting process. Just google his name and find the numerous articles on ESPN and other national sports media describing how prominent this guy is. 66.108.138.221 13:41, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment::"This is the users first edits". Please note: That we are talking about a high school student. He is not in college yet. Though it is my feeling that high school is trully an amateur sport, this discussion continuously fail to demonstrate whether it is the "highest level in mainly amateur sports" (as per the requirements of wikipedia biography guidelines WP:BIO#People still alive :sportspeople). Secondly, it is suggested to include a biography if the individual is at a club of sufficient stature that most members of its squad already have articles. Prove your case. Is this a verifiable and a notable club? For hockey in Canada we have AAA (called triple A), or "AA." or "A". In Ontario, Canada we have the OHL or the Ontario Hockey League. I believe many people consider this "A" major junior ice hockey (though they are paid a minimal amount of money) one of the highest amateur leagues. According to the wiki article amateur sports, money seems to be an issue. However, aren't college football student often rewarded by large bursaries, free education, and even a mediocre pay. If you take a look at my Ottawa team "Ottawa 67's" you will notice a section called Players of Note. I'm trying to understand this section, correct me if I am wrong, but on a first impression, I believe it is a list of former 67 players that have become famous. As per this example At a minimum I think Mat's stats and name could be put on the "High Schools Team Article". [[Georgia Bulldogs Football|Oh but wait, no one has started that article? (delayed comment: team is at Georgia Bulldogs Football which I eventually added to the article. --CylePat 02:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)) Someone might be able to argue "Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events." But what are the limits of this? What happens to journalist who constantly write article... or what about Joe blow from Ottawa who killed someone on the street two days ago? (that was just a top of mind example and I'm not saying Mat is anything of a resemblance to a criminal, I'm just trying to say that that argument, though I have suggested it, might not be appropriate). Anyway, if the many suggestion I have provided do not provide common sense for someone to develop this article into another venue, I really don't know what will except for my aforementioned comment of "'this is only a comment: delete (I have already, even though wikipedia is not a voting system, stated this "vote"" --CylePat 15:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Stafford is graduating HS ealy and enrolling in Georgia January 3rd. If you delete it now, you know it will be back up in no time.
    • above was UNSIGNED by 70.129.142.213, (This users 1st edit). (also note that users[contributions] are weird. Again. Comment.: Mat is not a pro yet. If he does then we should maybe consider the article. --CylePat 06:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment: I finally found a source that seems reputable that indicates Mat is going to Georgia College next year but it says spring 2006. Some other place says he's already enrolled. Dear Unsigned or anyone. If you can provide the source of the information... that is that he's enrolling "on January 3rd", that would be greatly appreciated. (even then we all know how hasty some news papers can be at trying to be the first to publish information) This is important to the delete subject because it put in question his present status (even though he hasn't even done the try outs for the QB position) Actually now that I think about it, he could miserably fail at not be accepted on the team even though he's at Georgia, right? So, again we're into prospective semi-pro athlete. I'm still not convinced. And, how many football players at Georgia have their own article? --CylePat 16:36, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
First off, an article stating he's enrolling in the Spring of 2006 is an article stating he is enrolling in January. The vast majority of American Universities work on a two semester a year system. The first semester runs August-December and is known as Fall Semester. The second semester runs January-May and is called Spring Semester. Therefore, when they say he's enrolling Spring of 2006, they are conveying to the reader that he will begin classes in January of 2006, as we've been stating all along. Also I'm not quite sure why you think someone would invent the idea that Matthew Stafford is beginning classes in a couple weeks just to have his bio posted, but nonetheless you can find that information at plenty of other places as well. For instance, you can visit the University of Georgia's website and utilize their "search for people" function to see that Matthew Stafford is already enrolled as a student. This is the most official source possible. You would not find Stafford in the UGA system unless he has already enrolled in classes. In other words, If he were not going to be taking classes until next August, he wouldn't be in the system yet. You can search for him here. http://www.uga.edu/inside/find.html

Or you can visit the Atlanta Journal Constitutions website and right this second you will se a picture of Matt Stafford front and center with the caption underneath that reads "QB Matthew Stafford enrolls at Georgia in January as its star recruit." http://www.ajc.com There is also a detailed in-depth story on him connected to the picture- http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/uga/1205/18stafford.html Or you could go to either of the websites devoted to covering UGA sports and ask one of the people who run the sites as their job when Stafford begins classes. You will not want to do this, however, because due to the extreme interest in the sport and UGA, these sites charge a monthly fee to read their articles and talk to their experts. You can find these sites at http://www.ugasports.com or http://www.georgia.theinsiders.com. At the very least you could go to the following page and look at the list of 50 something various articles, although you won't be able to read the content for free, that have talked about Stafford on that website alone. http://uga.rivals.com/prospectnam.asp?Type=1&Sport=1&pr_key=29228

Thank you, user:66.191.177.80 for your above comment (which you forgot to sign). Interesting enough, I believe, we still need to know if top recruits for a (semi-pro) sport is an important enough step for inclusion into wikipedia for a biography article? (You might think I'm agreeing with you but I couldn't possibly comment on that right now!) --CylePat 21:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


Okay! Enrollement into the University of Georgia is the first step. Now we are waiting to see if he is accepted into Georgia Bulldogs Football. After that I think there is still a long way to go, such as being listed in this section: Football allstars or at least the Roster and Bio. So stilll not convinced. --CylePat 22:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

First, sorry for forgetting to sign the last comment. Second, he has already been accepted into the Football program. In the United States, you get recruited to play football at a University. In other words, by signing with UGA, he has not only been accepted, but UGA has promised to him that they will pay for the cost of his education, any injuries he incurs during his career, his housing, his food, his school books, and a monthly stipend. This is a necessary facet of the American football system because players are not allowed to enter the NFL until they are three years removed from high school. Combine the inability to play at the highest level because of this restriction with the high percentage of quality football players that come from low income families, and you find a need to provide college football players with these perks in order to insure they can matriculate at the university. Furthermore, his name cannot be added to that official roster and bio link you entered until he starts classes, or in other words January. The NCAA, which oversees college sports in the USA, does not allow Universities to make comments on kids that have not yet taken classes. In other words, even though he has been widely published about in Nat'l media outlets for a couple years and has been officially accepted and enrolled at UGA, no one on the UGA staff can comment on him until he takes his first class. The NCAA would consider posting his roster and bio on that page to be a comment on him. Therefore, you will not see his bio officially added until after classes start back up in a couple of weeks. As for whether or not he needs to be on the All Star page, you should note that there is at least one member of the team, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Tereshinski_III , who is not on that list but has a bio that has apparently never been questioned on Wikipedia. 66.191.177.80 23:34, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 :) AHHa! And the smoking gun is finally here! (or at least a fairly good point to take into consideration) :) Good job on counter argument! Now we must see if that precedence withstands the tests of WP:BIO. I say that because seemingly, that article doesn't have many categories listings, or anything linking to it. This means the article, I believe, might not have had the chance to be properly revued by a substantial amount of peers. It may not be the best precendence. However, I would seemingly tend to support that article, (under the impression that this is a player of that college team) This is only because you have indicated he is on the team roster already. (that article itself sucks and needs much improvement) Anyway I tried finding something similar with my University team the Ottawa Gee Gees but I couldn't find a precedence. And though you example is seemingly good, there still might be a better one out there, no? --CylePat 02:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry if this is off topic, but what do you mean by "sign". I dont have an account here, so my only ID is my IP address, and Im not going to sign that. I guess I'll go ahead and create an account. Sorry for my 2 poor contributions, they were a prank I pulled to make my friend laugh. It wont happen again.

(This does not regard the delete topic but the signature of comments on wiki) I see you made a login! (from our edit conflict) You're on your way to a good start. Many benefits come with signing in. You get an easy to watch page history. You also get, according some wikipedians, some notority, credibility, etc... (which works sometimes against you) Anyway. It appears to be wiki guideline to sign in, specially when dealling with the deletions of an article. If you want you can leave a message on my user page by simply clicking my name at the end and going to the discussion page. To leave your signature simply type --~~~~ or use the before last box on the top (just before the line --) --CylePat 04:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks --Cronosquall 06:53, 19 December 2005 (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.