Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donnell Beverly

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Donnell Beverly

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Averaged all of 2 points per game for the UConn men's basketball champs. Winning an NCAA title does not grant notability. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 20:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Does not pass WP:NBASKETBALL and hasn't received significant coverage in independent reliable sources, so doesn't pass WP:GNG. Jenks24 (talk) 00:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Definitely doesn't meet notability for college athletes at this point - no awards, records or non-trivial new coverage. Just a run of the mill college player at this point in his career. Also looks like the whole article is cut and paste from his bio on the UConn site. Rikster2 (talk) 19:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet WP:NSPORTS for college athletes and does not meet WP:GNG for significant, non-WP:ROUTINE coverage in multiple independent sources. I've also tagged the article as a copyright violation of his university's website. —Bagumba (talk) 02:28, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is to be deleted due to its supposed irrelevancy, then I don't see how the articles for Miles Plumlee and several other Duke players aren't being nominated for deletion as well. All of the same characteristics apply, as far as lack of awards and everything else. I suggest that you give that article a good look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.159.172.107 (talk) 02:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Just because Miles Plumlee hasn't won an award and happened to play for a national championship-winning team doesn't mean Donnell Beverly deserves an article. Not all of the same characteristics apply either, as you claim, because on a cursory Google scan of "Miles Plumlee" I found plenty of non-routine coverage of him as a player. Not to mention he was a significant role player, whereas Beverly got lucky to be on a team that won the national championship without much help from him. Jrcla2 (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh boy, sounds like we're dealing with a Duke fan here. The other editor's claim wasn't that Beverly deserved an article because Plumlee had one. The point was that Plumlee shouldn't have an article if Beverly doesn't as he's not any more notable. You can submit conjecture about what he may do in the future, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I don't know why I bothered to type this as I'm sure it will be dismissed with some sarcastic and insulting remarks. After all, I'm just an IP editor and therefore know nothing. 76.119.77.101 (talk) 21:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(condensed logic from above) 'Beverly should have an article if Plumlee has one' =/= 'Plumlee shouldn't have an article if Beverly doesn't have one'. I'm confused as to how they're not the same idea. Additional comments: (1) You gave no rationale for supporting why Beverly deserves an article; rather, all you did was make a claim based on opinion that Plumlee doesn't deserve an article, which is not the issue here. (2) No Wikipedia guidelines or policy was used to show why Beverly still deserves inclusion; i.e., failing to argue without evidence is a quick dismissal. (3) According to Google, Plumlee is more notable, which is why WP:GNG exist in the first place – to show why arguments such as yours are not the case. (4) I'm clearly a William & Mary alum, and have been a CAA homer ever since. I enjoy ACC basketball too, but I don't favor any college teams beyond that. Go Tribe. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:14, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just would like to let everyone participating in this discussion, and for reviewing admins once it's closed, to know that the commenting IP above (76.119.77.101), Beverly's article creator User:Walt2020 (talk), and random yet-to-chime-in User:FabFuneralFive (talk) are 99.9% likely to be the same person. Their editing histories and exact edits made are uncanny. Jrcla2 (talk) 21:22, 27 May 2011 (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.