Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chad Hayes (American football)

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:10, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chad Hayes (American football)

Chad Hayes (American football) (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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NGRIDIRON, having only played professionally for minor league NFL Europe. Unable to find any significant coverage to pass GNG. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete a non-notable football player.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nominator. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Undecided for now but there is some significant coverage available at NewsLibrary.com from Maine newspapers, including: (1) "Old Town's Hayes signs with Bengals Ex-UMaine star plays in World Bowl", Bangor Daily News, 6/16/04 (610 words); (2) "A star for the Galaxy, and beyond?, Former UMaine tight end Chad Hayes hopes his play in today's NFL Europe final leads him back to the NFL", Portland Press Herald, 6/12/04 (702 words); (3) "Hayes fighting to make Chiefs' roster Former UM, Old Town star adjusting to NFL", Bangor Daily News, 8/22/02 (567 words); (4) "NFL draft no dream for Hayes, The UMaine tight end is likely to become the first Maine native picked since 1970", Portland Press Herald 4/19/02 (688 words); (5) "UMaine's Hayes eager for draft day Tight end hopes to be picked by NFL", Bangor Daily News, 4/10/02 (815 words); (6) "Hayes gets national attention UMaine tight end scrutinized by scouts", Bangor Daily News, 1/30/02 (1,040 words); (7) "Hayes selected for all-star contest Rotary Gridiron Classic is Jan. 26", Bangor Daily News, 1/16/02 (1,220 words); (8) "Old Town native Hayes gives Black Bears versatile weapon at tight end", Bangor Daily News, 10/5/01 (760 words); (9) "HAYES BOUNDS INTO SIGHT, Easily overlooked as a UMaine freshman, Chad Hayes expects to be anything but as a senior", Portland Press Herald, 8/12/01 (907 words); and (10) "Old Town's Hayes eager to help Bears; Sophomore tight end projected as starter", Bangor Daily News, 8/16/99 (978 words). Not enough under WP:NCOLLATH, but he also received second-team All-America honors (Division I AA) from "The Sports Network" and Associated Press in 2001 (see here). Cbl62 (talk) 00:17, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Meets GNG per Cbl62 sources. The problem is that he played largely before the modern internet era but there do seem to be sources for him. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 19:03, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:NGRIDIRON and WP:NCOLLATH, and the coverage is routine local coverage of a local sportsperson in a minor collegiate league. SportingFlyer T·C 01:51, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete A large amount of sources were found but they are mostly local. Fails WP:NCOLLATH. James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 13:15, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep CBl's sources to me show a pass of WP:GNG, and not just one or two but enough to put together an article. It has been argued that the coverage is mostly local, but the word "local" is no where to be found in WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The sources referenced above constitute significant coverage in multiple, reliable, and independent sources. If the coverage were limited to a single smalltown paper, WP:GNG would not be satisfied, but the coverage here is unusually extensive and si found in both the Portland Press Herald and the Bangor Daily News. Cbl62 (talk) 16:10, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC, per Cbl62's sources. Ejgreen77 (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm sorry, but I have to invoke WP:INDISCRIMINATE here. Hayes has been written about in his local hometown paper (he grew up in Old Town and played college ball in Orono, which are both ten miles down the road from Bangor) and by the Portland, Maine paper (which, looking through their archives, covers all college football in Maine). There's no coverage of him which isn't local coverage of a local player. The sources I can access all interview him heavily, which brings the question of whether these sources are sufficiently independent into play. And apart from being a second-team All-American in a non-top-tier college division, he really didn't accomplish much on the gridiron, never quite making the NFL like so many others. Keeping this would mean our standards for notable college football players are if you get written about in your hometown paper plus one other local paper, and I think that goes against the entire premise of the notability of WP:NSPORTS, as WP:GNG is really just a proxy for "is this person worthy of note?". However, it looks like he did play in NFL Europe, and if he was covered significantly there I might change my mind. SportingFlyer T·C 01:19, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • response to me the content seems to be very WP:DISCRIMINATE in nature. I don't see how WP:INDISCRIMINATE even applies.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:39, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The essay at WP:DISCRIMINATE includes the following: 2. An indiscriminate collection of information is one gathered without care or making distinctions or in a thoughtless manner. 3. A discriminate collection of information is one gathered where care and/or distinctions about the information contained in the collection are made--in a thoughtful manner. What the hell did this guy do to actually become a notable football player, worthy of inclusion in our encyclopaedia, apart from getting writeups in the two papers which cover the lower-level team he plays for, one of which is his hometown paper and is likely to cover him regardless? I know I'm not going to convince anyone here, but I used to write feature stories on local amateur athletes for the local paper, and I'm absolutely convinced those stories don't convey lasting notability. We need to be much more discerning with players who fail both WP:NGRIDIRON and WP:NCOLLATH as opposed to just "there's enough coverage from his hometown paper" and I think this is a classic example. SportingFlyer T·C 02:54, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While there is nothing in WP:GNG saying local newspapers don't count in assessing notability, I, too, tend to discount the coverage somewhat if the coverage is limited to a small, hometown newspaper. Several things are different here and led to my "keep" vote: (1) the coverage extends to two different newspapers, (2) both are newspapers with statewide coverage, not simply small town newspapers, indeed they are the two largest circulation newspapers in Maine (see here), (3) each paper has run multiple stories on Hayes, (4) the All-America honors (albeit I-A) add some weight to the topic; and (5) the fact that he was signed by four separate NFL teams, and played in NFL Europe, adds further weight. Put those all together, and I tip to "keep". This is not just some low-level player with no meaningful accomplishments who simply had a one-off puff piece written about him in a small town newspaper. Cbl62 (talk) 11:30, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I genuinely appreciate your response. I understand your assessment and you're correct there's some grey involved. I just think on the balance I'm still at a "weak delete" on the basis the two newspapers that were supposed to cover him covered him, along with the fact he didn't play at the highest level of the collegiate game (though this article's likely to be kept.) If there were coverage of him from NFL Europe (I looked and couldn't find any) that might tip me over to a weak keep. SportingFlyer T·C 12:50, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep - Significant coverage in 2 state-wide sources is a little more meaningful than simply coverage in 1 or 2 small town sources. He also received some relevant coverage I could find in Tennessee. Not great, but specific to him: [1] [2] [3] Rlendog (talk) 16:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Multiple independent sources have covered the subject in detail and thus it passes WP:GNG as well as WP:ANYBIO.--TM 02:32, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Namiba: How exactly does Hayes pass WP:ANYBIO? Receiving second-team I-AA All-America recognition is certainly not a well-known or significant award. Eagles 24/7 (C) 12:17, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct, my mistake. The article does pass WP:GNG though.--TM 18:02, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Definitely doesn't pass WP:NGRIDIRON or WP:ANYBIO. I don't think coverage in essentially two local papers is enough to meet the GNG. That's a really liberal interpretation of "multiple sources" and I can only how many hundreds of thousands of people around the world would meet it that are not generally considered notable by Wikipedia.Sandals1 (talk) 18:04, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Doesn't pass WP:NGRIDIRON or WP:NCOLLATH and agree with Sandals1 that multiple articles in 2 papers is not enough to meet WP:GNG especially with the amount of coverage American football gets in the US, 2 sources seems like very little. Rachoote —Preceding undated comment added 00:44, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's nothing in GNG that requires more stringent requirements for American football than for any other field.--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • GNG asks for "significant coverage". Significance is relative. What constitutes as significant might vary from field to field, and more frequent reporting does not increase significance. For example, scientific discoveries do not get regular press coverage, whereas sports, such as American football do. Rachoote —Preceding undated comment added 04:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying that the exact same coverage presented here would be sufficient to pass GNG if the subject were a scientist but does not suffice here because the subject is a football player. That approach invites partisan fighting over which professions are more important and is not how GNG works. Cbl62 (talk) 05:19, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As Cbl62 pointed out above, he got significant coverage in the two largest circulation newspapers in the state of Maine. For notability purposes, I'd argue that's probably similar to the type of coverage we would expect members of the Maine state legislature to receive, and those people are all auto-notable, per WP:NPOL. Ejgreen77 (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2020 (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.