Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grant Kay

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 merge to Tampa Bay Rays minor league players. Of note is that the nominator has also stated that they are "...okay with a merge...) (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:24, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Kay

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

Non-notable minor league ballplayer. (I'm okay with a merge, but that got reverted for some reason) Wizardman 00:23, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It got reverted because I had removed the Prod with an explanation, which is: there are many, many, many similar articles in the Wikipedia and there needs to be a wider discussion about their inclusion or deletion. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 00:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 00:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 00:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Yes, it may be time to have a discussion regarding the low standard for what often passes for "significant coverage" per WP:GNG in AfD discussions regarding minor league baseball players. I participate in AfD discussions across multiple sports, and I've got to say, guys, that WP:Baseball typically employs the lowest common denominator among the major sports WikiProjects. "Significant coverage" really was intended to mean more than a random sentence or two in an article about the player's team or an individual game, WP:ROUTINE game coverage, college recruiting sites, MLB draft evaluation sites, and non-mainstream sites that specialize in the coverage of minor league sports. This may not be the ideal example to have that discussion, but it is time for WP:Baseball to have an internal discussion about the standards that our members are applying in AfD discussions, especially in light of the one-game rule of WP:NBASEBALL. WP:Football (i.e. the European soccer guys) routinely delete players such as this even though they may technically satisfy the Association football specific notability guideline. Do we really want several thousand articles about minor league baseball players, many of which no one is ever going to read? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Run of the mill player who was just drafted in the 27th round this year. Not even notable for a re-direct at this point.--Yankees10 01:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In cases where an article doesn't meet an inclusion guideline like NBASEBALL's "one game in MLB" (which by the way is not universally upheld, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smith (baseball)) it should come down to the sources. I do agree with Dirtlawyer1 that "significant coverage" means more than a throwaway sentence or two in an article or a scout.com profile. In this case, the referencing in the article is clearly substandard. So do sources exist that aren't cited that if added would bring this up to the level of GNG? There's this article from The Courier-Journal, which helps his case, even though its not in excessive depth. This one, from the same publication, provides more depth than the first. Then there's this from the Poughkeepsie Journal. That's just from the first page of a Google search for "Grant Kay Louisville". There may be enough out there for him to satisfy GNG. At this point, more searching is needed to truly determine that. – Muboshgu (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Run-of-the-mill needs to come into play at some point with a guy like this. A 27th rounder from just this year who won no major awards in college and is still in low-A ball. What exactly separates this guy from hundreds of other minor league players other than the fact he had one more article or two written about him than others?--Yankees10 16:24, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Run-of-the-mill is an important consideration, but I'm not sure this is a run-of-the-mill player. He might be, certainly falling to the 27th round suggests that he may be (usually prospects are taken in the first 15 to 20 rounds, with the best of them in the first few, and beyond that is organizational filler). Whether or not he is "run-of-the-mill" comes down to the sourcing that exists, or does not exist. In just the first page of Google results, I found those three articles, which alone do not establish GNG, but do contribute towards it. Those are not mere game reports, which WP:MILL mentions specifically. As the essay says, "In order for such a commonplace item to be worthy for inclusion in an article, there must be sources provided other than those that would source so many others just like it." In-depth profiles are what it's talking about. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We have certainly relied on far less significant coverage in other minor league baseball player AfD discussions. I don't disagree that such coverage contributes to satisfying GNG, and I also don't disagree that the subject is not particularly "notable" in the dictionary sense, if not the Wikipedia sense. How do we rationalize deleting this article, when we have kept other minor league players with less significant coverage? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard for me to respond to this without knowing which articles you're referring to. Maybe some have been kept that shouldn't have been, it's quite possible and in fact likely. BTW here's another article on Kay. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:51, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I find WP:NBASEBALL to be too restrictive in that AAA minor league teams operate in major cities and they are considered direct Major League prep factories. That said, this individual plays for a "Short-Season A" team, so he even fails my standard for presumed baseball notability. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:06, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Tampa Bay Rays minor league players as he seems to have some notability but not enough for his own article. Spanneraol (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In the Poughkeepsie Journal article, it says "Kay is believed to be the only player to ever hit for the cycle in his first Minor League Baseball game." (surely not a run-of-the-mill occurrence) Until I came to that sentence, I was wondering why stories were being written about a seeming nondescript player. This is something that seems to push him into "barely notable". Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak Keep~~. I came into this thinking this is likely an easily merge-able subject, yet needed the overarching discussion I described above. However, what strikes me is the number of mainstream news articles that have focused solely on him (examples in links above and found via Google search). Also, there is the unique feat mentioned in the comment directly above this vote. Also, he seems to have been a critical player on the Louisville team that made it to the College World Series (not enough by itself for notability, but it's a part of the overall picture). I sense only increasing notability on the horizon, but at this point, I judge the subject as at least barely notable. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:27, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NBASEBALL and lacks the coverage required by GNG.204.126.132.231 (talk) 19:52, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge To Tampa Bay Rays minor league players. Alex (talk) 18:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 02:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Spanneraol. Rlendog (talk) 16:34, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - To my way of thinking the choice was delete or merge to the minor league players' list, and in light of the handful of sources found by Muboshgu, I have decided to preserve the content in part by merging. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Dirtlawyer1. This overrides my previous vote. I am doing this for the sake of consensus and preservation of the content as I think there's a good probability this subject will be clearly notable in due time. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:11, 18 September 2014 (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.