Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chase Headley

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. -Doc^g 01:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chase Headley

Minor league baseball player. Speedy deletion overturned at Deletion Review, now listed here for full consideration. Procedural listing, I have no opinion. ~ trialsanderrors 04:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete When he reaches the majors (or, at the very least, wins the Triple-A MVP award or something of that sort), give him an article. Until then, he's not sufficiently notable. -- Kicking222 04:40, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I hate to delete a Missions player but there is no assertion of encyclopedic notability here, just a minor league player. Eluchil404 04:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Confirm delete, but weakly. The new sources do go a long way to asserting notability, but many of them are still trivial and I'd rather wait until he makes it to the majors. Eluchil404 07:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete original speedy should never have been overturned. Massively more bytes have been wasted on debating this than exist in the article, and the article itself completely fails to establish notability. Guy (Help!) 08:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now (untill he reaches the majors). Minor league players are not notable. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 11:36, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see WP:BIO --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nothing notable about this person. Minor leaqguers don't meet the criteria for articles. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see WP:BIO. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree that minor leaguers do not meet notability standards unless they are likely to become major leaguers (for example Philip Hughes). This guy is no exception. 129.98.212.144 05:41, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In that case, you shouldn't be voting delete. He was an invite to spring training last spring, which is typically a good sign that they're "likely" to become major leaguers. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:N. I don't know Minor League players from Adam (so how did I get into this, again?) but these articles do seem to say he is likely to become a major leaguer. In any case, they do make for meeting the prime criteria of Wikipedia: Notability, "has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works".
- "Vols' duo on way to Padres system: Headley, Alley both drafted by San Diego", By Kevin T. Czerwinski / MLB.com, June 17, 2005
- "Headley named to AFL 'Rising Star Showcase'", By MadFriars.com, October 24, 2006, Scout.com
- "Headley has 'makeup' to be a star", By Amanda Branam / MLB.com, August 31, 2006.
- "Headley headlining Arizona Fall League", By Benjamin Hill / Special to MLB.com October 13, 2006
- "Q&A with Padres' Prospect Chase Headley", By Denis Savage, September 19, 2006, Scout.com
- "Scouting Padres' Prospect: Chase Headley", By Denis Savage, April 2, 2006, Scout.com
- "Padres Prospect Interview: Chase Headley", By John Conniff, August 29, 2005
- "Daily Dish: July 5" by Chris Kline, July 5, 2006, Baseball America

So what do these stories say? Well, "surpassed Todd Helton for most walks in a single-season in Tennessee baseball history."; "Top prospect in Padres organization"; "former college standout at the University of Tennessee"; "He's a poster child for being a baseball player"... AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 16:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Here, I expanded the article, added all those links to the article as in-line references, and found a fully free picture. He's actually an interesting guy, using his mental abilities (he was his high school valedictorian and an academic all-American in college) to make up for not being quite as physical as some of his peers. Please look at it again, folks. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 19:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, sports variations on the ol' crystal ball, that by-golly he's going to be somebody someday, from specialist websites. Pretty thin beer to base an article on. --Calton | Talk 23:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, I don't know how i missed this leaving DRV. As AnonEMouse showed (and I had two of those links bookmarked), he definitely meets WP:N and already meets WP:BIO. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep references demonstrate WP:N. --Oakshade 00:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per AnonEMouse. ALKIVAR™ ☢ 07:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable. CRGreathouse (t | c) 09:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per AnonEMouse. --Kevin Murray 08:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:53, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- No vote. I relisted this debate on the grounds that AnonEMouse's edits may have saved this from deletion, given the last three opinions after the rewrite. So, I give this back to the community to re-evaluate. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per AnonEMouse's links. --- RockMFR 07:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't know much of anything about baseball, so to me the difference between "major league" and "minor league" isn't relavent (and appears to be a purely subjective judgment). What's important is the fact that this person has been noted by the media on several occassions, which qualifies them per WP:BIO. Tarinth 09:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the Mouse. I loathe baseball (except as a soporific), but I can't dispute that it's notable, and the refs seem to demonstrate that this fellow is too. Xtifr _tälk 10:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per anonemouse. Incidentally, good work mouse. You really put a lot of effort into analyzing this article and not just giving it a cursory glance. Quadzilla99 11:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Rewrite demonstrates notability. Oldelpaso 15:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - even with the work by the Mouse. I don't really think minor league players are notable, but this player hasn't even played AAA ball. -- Bpmullins | Talk 22:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A minor-league player? Lowers the bar of WP:N or WP:BIO to meaninglessness. And before badlydrawnjeff cuts-and-pastes his standard reply, perhaps he could cite the specific portions --plural -- of WP:BIO that this meets, other than the techinality of "fully professional"? --Calton | Talk 23:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not Jeff, but if I could? The main part of WP:N, featured in external sources. In WP:BIO it reads: "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person."

I have to admit, I don't know anything about playing in the minor leagues, if someone says it's not notable, I can't argue with them. But I do know about multiple independent published works. He's got them. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 14:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - well sourced. --Duke of Duchess Street 02:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think that playing in the minor leagues is notable. --BenWhitey 05:09, 31 December 2006 (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.