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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 11:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Baumann[edit]

Really, is an article about a shooter who placed 8th in the Olympics a century ago really notable? Pal5017 04:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that there is a category for 1896 Olympic shooters, and most of them are even less notable than this guy, as in they didnt finish the competition or their finishing place was not known. I am adding those as we speak, so please do not point that out as some sort of double standard.--Pal5017 04:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note - 26 of the 39 articles in that category have been linked to this deletion at this point. -- Jonel | Speak 05:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to add those names, but my list was lost, and Im not about to redo it. Either way, the others are even less notable than Baumann. They have no dates of birth or death, most only have one name given, and most of their finishes are not known at all, or atleast only to the extent that they didnt finish very high. If there was more biographical information known, or they received a medal, I would say differently, but as it is now, they didnt, so I continue to support my AfD.--Pal5017 05:20, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I'm changing my vote YellowPigNowNow 05:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm inclined to support "keep", but it should be noted that the fact of one's competing in the Olympics in 1896 (or even 1900, 1904, or 1908) surely doesn't resolve the question of notability as might the fact of one's competing in, say, the Athens or Turin Games. Importantly, few countries participated in the first several iterations of the Modern Olympics, and, in some cases, all competitors in a given event hailed from the host country. One's participating, then, didn't necessarily mean that he/she was at the top of his/her sport internationally, only that he/she was in the right place at the right time (see, e.g., Tennis at the 1896 Summer Olympics, where the singles competition was won by an Irishman on vacation in Greece who was entered by a friend on a whim and where the doubles competition was won by that Irishman and his first-round singles opponent, who was at the games to compete in athletics). While medalling in an Olympic event is notable per se (such that the Irishman, John Pius Boland, irrespective of his competition at the Games or of his general tennis history, merits an article), it is probably fair to say that an athlete who competed in the an early Summer Games is not necessarily notable solely for his/her having participated. It's a close call, though, and I certainly understand that some may think it best to consider participation in the Olympics as passing a bright-line rule. Joe 05:12, 5 April 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.
More