Talk:Dee Strange-Gordon

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance). Baseball: College / Dodgers / Mariners Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of baseball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BaseballWikipedia:WikiProject BaseballTemplate:WikiProject BaseballBaseball articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject College baseball. This article is supported by WikiProject Los Angeles Dodgers (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Seattle Mariners.

It's unclear to me whether the sources used in this article confer notability as per

He is the Dodgers top prospect, I thought it was agreed that being a top prospect usually means they are notable for articles.--Yankees10 16:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of any such agreement. Per what guideline?

Phils) 16:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Im not sure if you were involved in the discussion when User:Gjr rodriguez kept making a bunch of non-notable minor league players, but I believe that it was agreed that top prospects would be kept, I could be wrong.--Yankees10 16:51, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was involved in the discussion, and as far as I was aware, prospects with coverage that didn't have enough to merit their own articles were to be merged into the team lists. From reviewing a couple of the Gjr AfDs just now, I don't see any consensus that specific prospects are to be kept if they don't meet

Phils) 17:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I think we should bring it to WP:baseball, but not AFD, It shouldnt be deleted.--Yankees10 17:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, AfD is not just for deletion; merge is always a possible outcome of an AfD, and that's probably the most likely outcome there. That being said, I'll open a discussion at

Phils) 17:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I think Gordon is significant enough to have his own article per added sources. Spanneraol (talk) 02:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There seems to be enough sources to satisfy

WP:N

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120606120745/http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-0604-dodgers-notes-20120604,0,3186968.story to http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-0604-dodgers-notes-20120604,0,3186968.story

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—