Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alicia Gladden
Source: 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 no consensus. Mkdwtalk 01:11, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alicia Gladden
- Alicia Gladden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
College basketball player does not meet the WP notability standard for athletes - see
WP:NCOLLATH, and Gladden also fails here, as there is little to no national media attention as required by the guideline. (In fact, other than reports of her death, there is little media coverage at all). Wikipeterproject (talk) 07:45, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. 78.53.135.178 (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. 78.53.135.178 (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The EuroCup Women, in which she has participated for several years, is such a competition. Please do at least a bit of research before nominating an article. You've already edited your rationale
fivefour times after nominating the article, which is quite a hint you haven't done that. --78.53.135.178 (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]- Comment. From what I can gather, the Eurocup is a second tier competition and participation therein would therefore would not generally meet WP notability standards. As far as exposure and national media coverage goes, I think a simple Google news search almost speaks for itself here. The amount of editing of my nomination is irrelevant, since this is a question of notability as per WP guidelines, not how well one can draft a nomination. Note also that I have not made changes to the nomination rationale after anyone commented on it. Wikipeterproject (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment First, your nomination was solely based on her high school career, then on her college career. So you were still ignoring the teams listed in the infobox and the external links of the article. If you don't take into account the teams she had played for in recent years, that just is a poorly executed nomination. Second, yes it is a second tier competion, but on European level, in which only those teams can participate that have won their respective national championship or that have placed among the top teams of the best national leagues in Europe. Another supranational league Gladden (as a member of the Partizan squad) had participated in is the MŽRKL, which they won that year. Many of Gladden's former team mates play for their respective national teams, and some already are covered by Wikipedia articles. Also note that the EuroCup is played during the WNBA off season, and many WNBA players take part in it as well. Concerning news - well, if the level of competition she has played in is high enough, I don't see that as a problem, as long as there is the possibility for proper verification. --78.53.135.178 (talk) 17:22, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Observation: I can't find a single WP article for any player whose highest level of competition is the Eurocup Women. Wikipeterproject (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Even at more than 4 million articles, there still are areas of interest that are largely uncovered by Wikipedia yet, so that in itself doesn't tell you anything. Expansion always has to start somewhere. If someone plays with and against national team members and WNBA players (i.e., those who play at the highest competition level possible in women's basketball) on a regular basis, I don't see the inherent difference between her and them concerning notability. A pan-European competition isn't comparable to high school or college basketball with its big spreads of skill levels. While being part of the country's biggest multi sports club (as in the case of Partizan Belgrade) certainly helps a bit, these teams aren't funded by major institutions like universities, so teams not performing at "major professional" levels usually couldn't even afford travelling through Europe for just one game each. --78.53.134.187 (talk) 09:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You have valid points, but they aren't in line with the current policy. Even factoring in Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, in my personal opinion, her achievements aren't encyclopedically notable. Transcendence (talk) 23:59, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Even at more than 4 million articles, there still are areas of interest that are largely uncovered by Wikipedia yet, so that in itself doesn't tell you anything. Expansion always has to start somewhere. If someone plays with and against national team members and WNBA players (i.e., those who play at the highest competition level possible in women's basketball) on a regular basis, I don't see the inherent difference between her and them concerning notability. A pan-European competition isn't comparable to high school or college basketball with its big spreads of skill levels. While being part of the country's biggest multi sports club (as in the case of Partizan Belgrade) certainly helps a bit, these teams aren't funded by major institutions like universities, so teams not performing at "major professional" levels usually couldn't even afford travelling through Europe for just one game each. --78.53.134.187 (talk) 09:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Observation: I can't find a single WP article for any player whose highest level of competition is the Eurocup Women. Wikipeterproject (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment First, your nomination was solely based on her high school career, then on her college career. So you were still ignoring the teams listed in the infobox and the external links of the article. If you don't take into account the teams she had played for in recent years, that just is a poorly executed nomination. Second, yes it is a second tier competion, but on European level, in which only those teams can participate that have won their respective national championship or that have placed among the top teams of the best national leagues in Europe. Another supranational league Gladden (as a member of the Partizan squad) had participated in is the
- Comment. From what I can gather, the Eurocup is a second tier competition and participation therein would therefore would not generally meet WP notability standards. As far as exposure and national media coverage goes, I think a simple Google news search almost speaks for itself here. The amount of editing of my nomination is irrelevant, since this is a question of notability as per WP guidelines, not how well one can draft a nomination. Note also that I have not made changes to the nomination rationale after anyone commented on it. Wikipeterproject (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ]
- Delete Fails ]
- Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 23:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LFaraone 03:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep, the nominator is correct in pointing that the subject fails the letter of the NBASKETBALL guideline, but in my view EuroCup Women is an international competition even more important/significant than a national championship and still reflects the spirit of the guideline. Cavarrone (talk) 05:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.