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The result was withdrawn by nominator. No other arguments for deletion. (non-admin closure)  Gongshow ^Talk 04:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cliff Harris (cornerback) (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)

another player who had a page created largely due to potential NFL prospects, having been cut, he fails WP:NSPORTS and again, do legal troubles, an ESPN player card (that every NCAA player in the known universe has), and a recruiting page really allow him to pass WP:GNG or WP:ROTM? Go Phightins! (talk) 22:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep He was a consensus All-American in 2010. That certainly makes him notable enough to have a page.--Yankees10 00:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two things: one, nearly a hundred different players are named All-Americans per year and not all have pages: by my count, 10 All-Americans from 2011 and 4 from 2010 don't have a Wikipedia page. Harris was an All-American, not at his primary position, but at kick returner, which though an accomplishment, is not as high as if he were an A-A as a QB in my book. and two do any policies (e.g., WP:NSPORTS, WP:GNG, WP:ROTM, etc.) say that being named an All-American satisfies notability requirements? Seeing that just since 1990 thousands of players have been named All-Americans, and probably only half (these are just guesses) have Wikipedia pages, I just can't see that that is an end-all way to establish notability without additional sources and media coverage. Go Phightins! (talk) 01:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, my mistake. After re-reading the college athlete section and looking at the college football awards section, I see that being on an All America team is considered a major award. With that in mind, I withdraw my nomination because he meets WP:NSPORTS and therefore is deemed notable. Thanks for that comment, I didn't notice that he was on an All-America team prior to nominating. Go Phightins! (talk) 01:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Agreed. Consensus all-Americans shows evidence of passing WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Consensus All-American player. And a search of google news archive for ("Cliff Harris" Oregon) turns up over 1,000 hits including substantial coverage about Harris in national media outlets like ESPN.com and USA Today. Cbl62 (talk) 03:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. As noted above by Yankees10, Paul McD and Cbl62, Harris was a consensus first-team All-American in 2010. In order the be recognized as a consensus All-American by the NCAA, the athlete must have been chosen as a first-team selection by a majority of the five major selector organizations: the Associated Press, American Football Coaches Association, Football Writers Association of America, The Sporting News, and the Walter Camp Football Foundation. This is not the equivalent of being named an honorable mention All-American by the Muncie Mullet-Wrapper; contrary to the nominator's comments, consensus All-American recognition really is a big deal and it is considered to be a major national award in college football. Typically, 20 to 25 college football players are recognized as consensus All-Americans following each season--one for each defensive and offensive position, plus kickers. Harris' notability is well-established by significant, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject per WP:GNG. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 04:45, 4 September 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.