Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DeWayne Lewis

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 keep. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:23, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DeWayne Lewis

edit
DeWayne Lewis (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)

DeWayne Lewis is a non-notable former college football player who was a member of the Michigan State Spartans football team before he transferred and joined the Southern Utah Thunderbirds football team, a Division I FCS program. He was not selected in the 2009 NFL Draft, and signed with the Jacksonville Jaguars as an undrafted free agent in 2009, but he never played a down in a regular season NFL game. He is not entitled to a presumption of notability per WP:NGRIDIRON, and most satisfy the much tougher general notability standards of WP:GNG for inclusion—which he does not. All independent media coverage of Lewis appears to be of a routine nature, and no in-depth independent coverage of the subject appears to exist. It's a mystery how this article has survived for six and a half years. Please Delete. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note. The article was created in 2010 with this diff by a user who never edited any other article. It was mostly copyvio. I've removed most of the obviously pasted and/or plainly inappropriate content and added some sourcing. Still needs work if anyone wants to help. Cbl62 (talk) 19:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment in response to Cbl62. Let me say that I have nothing but respect for Cbl, and it's been pretty rare in my experience that we disagree on the substance of sports bio AfDs, but I must disagree with him here. Of the eleven sources cited above, four of them are press releases from organizations that are not independent of the subject athlete and are therefore disqualified as reliable sources for the purpose of establishing notability: item 1 is a press release from USA Football about Lewis making the USA Football squad; item items 8, 9 and 10 are press releases from Southern Utah University's athletic department about Lewis representing SUU sports teams in various events.

Items 2, 5, 6 and 7 are brief news announcements, not remotely approaching anything like in-depth coverage of Lewis, and are the very definition of "routine" coverage of sports events and awards. Item 11 is a video and a blog entry—no more a reliable source for establishing notability than any newspaper sports blog.

That leaves us with items 3 and 4. Item 3 is a 964-word Denver Post news article discussing Lewis' achievements at the 2003 high school state track & field championships. Item 4 is a 612-word article in The Spectrum, the regional newspaper in St. George, Utah, which is located in the adjoining county to SUU. The 2007 Spectrum article discusses how Lewis, as a transfer from Michigan State and a member of the SUU track team, is making a contribution to the SUU football team that was recently promoted from Division II to Division I FCS. These are the only two sources that are independent of their subject and cannot be immediately dismissed as routine coverage of sports events. Taken together, they nevertheless constitute a very slender thread to establish the notability of the subject athlete . . . one article about his high school accomplishments on a single day in 2003, and one brief "angle" story whose major purpose is to discuss the challenges facing the SUU football program. And let's keep in mind that the three track championships were at the high school level, not even at the Division II college level. (Query: isn't this exactly the sort of one-time occurrence that WP:EVENT is meant to disqualify?)

Sorry, but this stitched-together creation doesn't cut the mustard. Notability means meaningful coverage about the subject; these articles aren't that. If we are going to start including Wikipedia bios for every high school athlete who won a state track championship, or every FCS football jock who had a single "puff piece" (mostly) about him in the local newspaper, then we will have made a joke of the notability standards for athletes. Notability is not temporary "fame" arising from a single event—even when that event was winning three high school track championships in single day. In order to make Lewis appear notable, we have to stitch five press releases and four mostly meaningless 100 to 200-word routine sports articles together with two other articles, neither of which by themselves could establish the subject's notability. Sorry, Cbl, but this looks like boot-strapping. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply. No need to apologize. Reasonable minds can differ on these things. As I mentioned above, the points I find most persuasive are that he played on the 2011 Team USA squad that won the World Championship and was selected for the All World team based on his participation in the World Championship. That combined with three consecutive Colorado state sprint championships, All-Conference honors at the collegiate level in two sports, and a fair amount of non-routine coverage puts him above the bar IMO. Cbl62 (talk) 22:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Response on WP:EVENT. I don't think that WP:EVENT applies to Lewis. It says: "People known only in connection with one event should generally not have an article written about them." Lewis is not "known only" for winning the Colorado state 100-meter and 200-meter sprint championships in 2003 -- or for doing so three years in a row. He appears to have had a notable sports career that has lasted over 10 years, including being named SUU Athlete of the Year in 2008 and Best Defensive Back in the 2011 World Championships. And he's still actively competing for a spot in the Chicago Bears as of April 2012. Cbl62 (talk) 00:08, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Response on WP:ROUTINE. I don't agree that the coverage is all "routine." Per WP:NCOLLATH, the classic examples of routine coverage are "merely a repeating of their statistics" and "mentions in game summaries." The sources now added to the article include multiple instances where Lewis is the main subject of the coverage. Cbl62 (talk) 00:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Response re The Spectrum. It is inaccurate to say that the "major purpose" of the Lewis profile in The Spectrum "is to discuss the challenges facing the SUU football program." Having bought and read the article, it is an in-depth profile of Lewis from Texas to Denver to Michigan State and Utah, injuries, NCAA Track and Field Finals, etc. Cbl62 (talk) 23:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: The article infobox currently lists NFL stats (4 career tackles). Has he played in an NFL game (in which case he's presumed notable), or is the infobox wrong? cmadler (talk) 10:27, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (maybe) Maybe I'm mistaken, but he was on the official 54 man roster for 2 NFL teams for 2 years. That is enough for me. If I'm mistaken on this (the article is not clear), then I will withdraw my !vote.--GrapedApe (talk) 11:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment in answer to GrapedApe's question. If Lewis were ever a member of a regular season NFL roster, he would be listed on NFL.com. He is not listed—see NFL.com. Moreover, he is only entitled to a presumption of notability per WP:NGRIDIRON if he appeared in a regular season NFL or CFL game. Lewis has never appeared in a regular season pro game—see NFL.com [4], Pro-Football-Reference.com [5], and databaseFootball.com [6]. In order for Lewis to be notable for Wikipedia purposes, he must satisfy one of the following four potentially applicable notability standards for athletes:
1. general standard for athletes – Per Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Notability guidelines on sports persons, "Sports figures are presumed notable (except as noted within a specific section) if they . . . have participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level such as the Olympics[;] meet any of the qualifications in one of the sports specific sections below. [emphasis mine]
2. high school athletes – In order to be notable per Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Amateur sports persons, a high school athlete must have received "as individuals, substantial and prolonged coverage that is (1) independent of the subject and (2) clearly goes beyond WP:ROUTINE coverage. Note that the first clause would exclude all school papers and school websites that cover their sports teams and other teams they compete against. The second clause excludes the majority of local coverage in both news sources and sports specific publications. It especially excludes using game play summaries, statistical results, or routine interviews as sources to establish notability." [emphasis mine]
3. college athletes – In order to be notable per WP:NCOLLATH, a college athlete must "have been the subject of non-trivial media coverage beyond merely a repeating of their statistics, mentions in game summaries, or other WP:ROUTINE coverage. Examples would include head coaches, well-known assistant coaches, or players who . . . have won a national award (such as those listed in Template:College Football Awards or the equivalent in another sport), or established a major Division I (NCAA) record[;] [w]ere inducted into the hall of fame in their sport (for example, the College Football Hall of Fame)[;] and [g]ained national media attention as an individual, not just as a player for a notable team." [emphasis mine]
4. track and field athletes – In order to be notable per WP:NTRACK, athletes "are presumed notable if they meet any of the criteria below . . . has competed in the Olympics or senior IAAF World Championships[;] finished top 8 in a competition at the highest level outside of the Olympic games and world championships. Individual events in these championships must contain either several heats or extended fields (e.g. European Athletics Championships, Commonwealth Games, or any of the 5 World Major Marathons)[;] [f]inished top 3 in any other major senior level international competition (this includes prestigious small field meets, e.g. IAAF Diamond League/IAAF Golden League meets, less prestigious large scale meets, e.g. Asian Games, and any IAAF Gold Label Road Race that is not explicitly mentioned above)[;] [h]as won an individual gold medal at the IAAF World Junior Championships or Youth World Championships[;] [h]as won their country's senior national championship, with the exception of those that have never been ranked in the top 40 on the IAAF world leading list at the end of a given calendar year[;] [h]as won the elite division of multiple notable* road races (including the same race multiple times) or has established a history of highly competitive, non-winning performances in many notable races (at least 10 top threes)[;] [h]as at any time held a world or continental record (including world junior records, world youth bests and masters age-group world records) ratified or noted by the appropriate official body[;] [o]wns a mark that placed the athlete in the top 12 in the world for that calendar year in a non-relay event contested or admitted to the senior IAAF World Championships or Olympics, or an equivalent performance over a closely matching imperial distance[;] [h]as a non-relay mark listed on the IAAF senior all-time list or equivalent list[;] [h]as been inducted into the National Track and Field Hall of Fame or the Road Runners Club of America Hall of Fame.
Moreover the general notability standards of WP:GNG still apply, which states if a subject "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.
* "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.
* "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
* "Sources", for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected.[1] Sources are not required to be available online, and they are not required to be in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.
* "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject or its creator. For example, self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, the subject's website, autobiographies, and press releases are not considered independent.
* "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not appropriate for a stand-alone article. For example, such an article may violate what Wikipedia is not, perhaps the most likely violation being Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.
Guys, these are not easy standards to meet, especially if the criteria of one of the specific standards applicable to athletes are not met. My take is that Lewis does not satisfy any of the more specific standards for high school, college, football, or track & field jocks, or athletes generally, and therefore must strictly satisfy the general notability standards of WP:GNG. DeWayne Lewis never won a national championship, never won a major national award, never participated in a major international sports competition, and never participated in a regular season professional sporting event. Despite Cbl62's considerable efforts to revamp the article, the subject athlete simply does not satisfy any of the required notability standards. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply to Dirtlawyer. Good discussion, and I agree with much of what you say. I've been following college football AfDs for a couple years or more and have voted to delete many of them. I'd guesstimate that less than two percent of Division I (FBS/FCS) college football players would pass notability standards (and an even smaller percent of players below Division I). I had no involvement with the DeWayne Lewis article before this AfD, but after digging into it, I became convinced he passes the bar. For that reason, I've tried to improve the article substantially to give it a fair shake. (I suspect that, if the article had not been in such awful shape when you nommed it, you might not have done so.) We're probably both repeating ourselves a bit, but your recitation of the standards reaffirms my conclusion for the following reasons (either of the first two of which should suffice):
(1) Lewis has "participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level." The IFAF World Championship is the highest level of international competitions. It is held every four years and is operated by the IFAF, which is the international governing body of American football. Lewis not only participated in the 2011 IFAF World Championship, but he received the award as the Best Defensive Back to play in the event.
(2) Lewis has "been the subject of non-trivial media coverage beyond merely a repeating of their statistics, mentions in game summaries, or other WP:ROUTINE coverage." See refs 2, 6, 7, 10, 13, 19, all added to the article.
(3) Lewis gets an extra notability "bump" in my mind by virtue of having excelled in multiple areas. He was an elite sprinter (No. 1 in Colorado and among the elite in the US, having advanced to the NCAA Track & Field Championship) and also excelled in football (having helped lead Team USA to the World Championship).
I don't spend my time trying to rescue an article unless they're worthwhile. IMO Lewis is worthwhile. Cbl62 (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cbl, I have followed the sources that you have added to the article with interest. If we eliminate (1) the non-independent sources that are affiliated with Michigan State University, Southern Utah University, USA Football, the IFAF, the Mid-Continent Conference, and the Jacksonville Jaguars, (2) the sports fan blogs Cincy Jungle and nfl.net.co (not NFL-affiliated, BTW), and (3) the Youtube video, that leaves 13 sources from actual third-party professional news outlets. Of those 13 independent sources, 11 of them – footnote 7 (Spectrum, 10-08-2007), footnote 9 (Deseret News, 11-27-2008), footnote 10 (Spectrum, 4-29-2011), footnote 11 (Spectrum, 6-6-2007), footnote 12 (Salt Lake Tribune, 5-27-2007), footnote 13 (Spectrum, 5-27-2007), footnote 18 (Deseret News, 1-24-2008), footnote 19 (Salt Lake Tribune, 5-13-2008), footnote 21 (Spectrum, 2-29-2008), footnote 23 (Deseret News, 4-28-2009) and footnote 28 (Denver Post, 6-15-2011) – are either WP:ROUTINE coverage or trivial mentions or both.
After careful review that leaves only two potentially independent, non-routine, non-trivial sources: footnote 2 (Denver Post, 5-18-2003), and footnote 6 (Spectrum, 10-11-2008). Footnote 2, the Denver Post article, discusses Lewis' three high school track and field state championships in 2003. If we are attempting to qualify his notability as a high school athlete, the subject must have received "substantial and prolonged coverage." This is not high school phenomenon Tim Tebow, circa 2005, or Catie Ball, circa 1967; the coverage of Lewis' high school exploits is not anything approaching "substantial and prolonged."
That leaves only footnote 6, the Spectrum article, that recounts Lewis' personal history at MSU and SUU, and his accomplishments in two different sports. It is the only independent, non-routine, non-trivial source that supports the subject's notability as a college football and track athlete by providing substantial, in-depth coverage. That's a pretty darn slender reed to establish notability, especially when WP:GNG and WP:NCOLLATH presuppose multiple potentially independent, non-routine, non-trivial sources to establish notability.
Look, guys, I respect your opinions as experienced WP:CFB editors and administrators. You get it, and we're arguing the fine points in this case. Let us acknowledge, however, that we are pushing the limits to qualify a second-tier college athlete as notable. We can parse the language of the various notability standards and argue about the merits of the sources, and, yes, "reasonable minds" can differ, but here's the bottom line. DeWayne Lewis never won a national track championship at any level; he never received a major national award or honor in any sport; he never finished in the top eight in a major international track competition; he never set a national record in either sport. None of the news coverage the subject has received qualifies as "national media attention." He never played in a regular season professional football game.
The only way we can qualify the subject as notable is to boot-strap two non-trivial, non-routine sources about his mid-tier athletic accomplishments with lots of routine and trivial coverage and make an argument that his participation in the IFAF World Championships qualifies as participation in amateur American football "at the highest level." That's really weak. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) It appears that the IFAF World Championship is not only "a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level such as the Olympics" but it's the highest level of international competition for American football, the American football equivalent of the FIFA World Cup. Why does his participation in that not meet the general standard for athletes? cmadler (talk) 14:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cmadler, those are fair questions to be considered. First, the general notability of the IFAF World Championship itself is suspect. If it is a major international championship, why does it receive virtually no significant independent coverage? Look at the IFAF article sources: all of them are IFAF-related. They fail the independent sources requirement. A current Google News search reveals only a handful of mentions in American and Canadian newspapers, virtually all of which are about a local athlete's participation in the current U-19 tournament, not the senior IFAF World Championship itself.
Second, the IFAF cannot be fairly characterized as a "major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level" and it certainly is not played by Olympic-caliber athletes. If you read the source documents in the DeWayne Lewis and IFAF World Championships article you will discover that "Team USA" is composed of former Division I FBS, Division I FCS and Division II athletes whose college eligibility has expired, but were not drafted or signed by an NFL team. IFAF is not the American football equivalent of the Olympics, the FINA world swimming championships, the FIFA World Cup, the FIBA world basketball championship, or the IAAF world track and field championships. Amateur athletes at the highest level of competition in American football are playing at the NCAA Division I FBS level, not in the IFAF championship. IFAF participants are not the best of the best. How many All-Americans were on the last IFAF roster, how many first-team all-conference selections from FBS conferences? There is a reason why the standard cited by me and quoted by you include the words "such as the Olympics." This is not the Olympics, and it is not a major international championship. How could it be? No country outside of North America plays American football at its highest level. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the IFAF is not the highest level of international competition (amateur or professional), what is? cmadler (talk) 15:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the US has dominated the sport doesn't alter the fact that the IFAF World Championship is the highest level of international competition in the sport, run by the official international governing body. American football is seeing a growth in popularity internationally, much like women's softball did 15 years ago. That's why guys like Jack Kemp and Roger Goodell have actively promoted the IFAF. While the IFAF World Championship doesn't yet get the level of coverage received by the FIFA World Cup, I suspect the international championships in many sports are no different in the early stages. And if you look at international coverage, it looks like there's actually been a good deal of it. See, e.g., here. Less in the US but see Fox News, New York Times, this, this, this, this. Cbl62 (talk) 15:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, guys, back to basics. Here's the relevant part of the general notability standard for athletes: "Sports figures are presumed notable (except as noted within a specific section) if they . . . have participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level such as the Olympics."
My interpretation of that statement emphasizes different elements than yours. Let's parse the complete sentence. It not only requires participation in "a major international amateur . . . competition," it also requires that such competition be "at the highest level such as the Olympics." Do either of you really want to argue that the level of competition found in the IFAF is equivalent to that of the Olympics? Please note the full sentence does not say "a major international amateur . . . competition at [the] highest level," as if to say the highest available international tournament. It says competition "at the highest level such as the Olympics," which is a discussion of the level of athletic competition of the participants. Those are two very different standards. The highest level of competition and athletic ability in the sport vs. the highest existing international tournament. Based on the argument you are making, I could argue that the participants in the Little League World Series are also notable because the LLWS is the highest international tournament for amateur baseball players. Not quite the same thing, is it? Whereas the participants in the the FIFA, FINA, FIBA and IAAF championships are among the greatest athletes in the world in their respective sports, the IFAF participants clearly are not. Simply because the IFAF is the highest "international competition" for amateur American football does not make it a "competition at the highest level such as the Olympics." Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gentlemen, I might also note that if we apply your proposed interpretation of the general notability standards for athletes to the IFAF World Championship participants, every unknown player of American football from Australia, Austria, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mexico, South Korea and Sweden who ever played in one of the IFAF tournaments is also notable. I, for one, do not look forward to seeing those meaningless stubs on Wikipedia. Again, these are not Olympic-caliber athletes, and we are eroding the general notability standard in order to squeeze one very minor American athlete under the wire. How is that substantially different from saying that every college football player is also notable? Objectively, don't you think every scholarship athlete on the University of Alabama plays amateur American football at a higher skill level than every member of the Australian national team? What, then, makes every member of the Australian IFAF team notable when every member of the Crimson Tide is not? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Funny that you should bring up international baseball, since the very best baseball players have always been excluded, initially by the Olympic Games' amateurism rule, and later by MLB's refusal to break to allow pros to compete in the Olympics. In any event, after thinking about it for a while, I'm of the opinion that, although DeWayne Lewis meets the general notability standard for athletes, he is not actually notable and the article should be deleted. Meeting any notability guideline (including GNG) merely creates a presumption of notability, which can always be overridden based on discussion (e.g. this AfD). I'm working somewhat on the principle of jury nullification here, when I say delete. cmadler (talk) 16:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cmadler, I'm not arguing this point because I give a rat's backside one or another what happens to the DeWayne Lewis article. I'm arguing the point because I think there are a series of obvious holes in the notability standards for athletes and sports events, and I am using two of the better informed CFB and NFL project editors to flush out the arguments. When this AfD is over, I hope both of you would be willing to review and support proposed changes to WP:NSPORT, WP:NGRIDIRON, WP:NCOLLATH and WP:EVENT. I think the standards need to be tightened and clarified regarding college athletes and individual games. That may require that more specific example be incorporated. Personally, I think it is amazingly illogical that a consensus first-team All-American baseball player or an individual NCAA record holder in swimming or track is not presumed to be notable, but the existing notability rules allow us to string together a series of minor sources to construct a Frankenstein monster of marginal notability for a second-tier athlete like Lewis. The sports notability standards really need to be revisited in a global way and more objective bright lines need to be drawn, while still maintaining some degree of flexibility for truly unusual cases. I also think it is entirely appropriate that the CFB and CBB regulars take the lead in making such proposals. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dirtlawyer, Although we disagree on Lewis, there is much on which we agree. We would all spend less time on AfDs if we had some clearer standards for college football players. I'll give it some thought and post some broader ideas on the CFB talk page. Cbl62 (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree also; that's why I say that, although I think he meets the notability standard, the article should nevertheless be deleted as non-notable. cmadler (talk) 18:35, 2 May 2012 (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.
  1. ^ Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic. It is common for multiple newspapers or journals to publish the same story, sometimes with minor alterations or different headlines, but one story does not constitute multiple works. Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Similarly, a series of publications by the same author or in the same periodical is normally counted as one source.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/DeWayne_Lewis&oldid=1137773366"