Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Vitters

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. This is one of those "fun" AfD's where there is a clear consensus to Don't Delete, but less of a consensus as to what should be done instead. Comments below are split between Merge and Keep and make reasoned arguments for each option. There is thus No Consensus as to whether the article should be kept on its own or merged. The Talk page is the appropriate venue for further discussion. Eluchil404 (talk) 06:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Vitters

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

I am not convinced that this person meets the Wikipedia notability criteria for baseball players. He has not played at the highest level of his sport, and there do not seem to be sufficient reliable, independent sources writing about his significance in his sport. I did find some news articles about him, but they were all of the 'local sports coverage' sort. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:34, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:ATHLETE. Qworty (talk) 00:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm a little surprised if he has not received enough coverage for WP:GNG, since he has been one of Baseball America's top 100 prospects for 3 years and was the #3 pick of the draft. That will usually generate some coverage (e.g., at least a BA profile in their Prospects Handbook, a story about his being drafted) and since other sources seem to have had him rated highly, it seems like there would be others. He has had a profile in the annual Baseball Prospectus for the past 3 or 4 years. Rlendog (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I could be wrong. I only noticed this article because of the recently-created article about his brother. Naturally, if there is enough coverage, I don't think this should be deleted, even if it hurts his brother's feelings. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:44, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I found a bunch of coverage today (for some reason, these didn't come up yesterday): [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. These, combined with whatever coverage Baseball America would have provided and the coverage he received in Baseball Prospectus, should be enough to demonstrate his notability and keep (and of course used to source the article). If not, I agree with Alex that merge would be the next best resolution. Rlendog (talk) 21:04, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Chicago Cubs minor league players, as it is standard practice with current minor league players with articles to merge them with their team's minor league players page, if the player himself is not worthy of an article. Alex (talk) 08:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He has been a top 100 prospect by Baseball America 3 times, that makes him notable in my opinion.--Yankees10 18:37, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 19:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As being one of the Top 100 prospects from Baseball America thrice, #3 pick in his draft. Google news search was loaded with entries, including a recent article by the Chicago Tribune. The subject may not meet the recently neutered notability guidelines for WP:BASEBALL, but I think this high prospect in the Cubs organization more than meets the generel notability guidelines that trump WP:NSPORTS every day of the week. Agent Vodello^{OK, Let's Party, Darling!} 21:23, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Much of that coverage seems routine, as far as first round picks and minor leaguers are concerned. He might meet GNG, but I think at this point he falls a little short of it. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Chicago Cubs minor league players. Does not meet WP:GNG which requires "significant coverage" from multiple sources. The hits found on Google, though numerous, are mostly WP:ROUTINE coverage. WP:BASEBALL/N does not list being a Top 100 prospects from Baseball America as being notable. If he doesn't make it into the Major Leagues he will be yet another WP:Run-of-the-mill player cluttering Wikipedia based on premature article creation that does not meet GNG. —Bagumba (talk) 22:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per multiple reliable sources, see "Cubs awaiting breakout season from Vitters" and this interview.--TM 11:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Chicago Cubs minor league players as he is a highly regarded prospect with a better than average (for minor leaguers) chance of making an MLB debut in the next few years, who does not presently have enough notability on his own. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As Rlendog pointed out, there's a pretty clear case here that he meets WP:GNG. Qrsdogg (talk) 17:38, 31 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.