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 no consensus defaulting to keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:11, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
keep, professional ball player in the top league of Australia. If he were a 'footballer' you wouldn't discriminate against him 184.71.204.174 (talk) 02:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.Notability guidelines say major league players are notable but this guy struggled to be in Double A.12.144.5.2 (talk) 02:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's summer in Australia sir. They're the top flight professional league of the country.184.71.204.174 (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ABL is considered a winter league as it is a refuge for low-tier players during the North American winter. WWGB (talk) 05:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The best in Australia is not the same level as the best in the world.12.144.5.2 (talk) 05:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If he were a Footballer you wouldn't discriminate because every top tier football league in the world seems to be notable.184.71.204.174
Association football has world championships for clubs and countries,and eligible leagues are defined for clubs.Does the ABL qualify for a world baseball title of stature as the highest level of the sport worldwide?12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Although very unfortunate circumstances, as noted by others above, fails WP:NBASE. Dmoore5556 (talk) 05:55, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Tragic news but subject never played in the MLB and is lacking in notability. sixtynine• whaddya want? • 06:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This one is really interesting and difficult. I struggled with my Keep vote, but I think it's the right one, and here's why. I did a little research and there was more to unwrap than I expected. First the obvious: subject garnered enormous international coverage because of his untimely passing. Coverage includes ESPN, CNN, the Washington Post, Major League Baseball, People magazine, CBS Sports, Fox News, Sports Illustrated, and obviously tons of coverage in New Zealand and elsewhere. So in a strict reading of WP:NBASE, which says "Some active minor league players receive some coverage from reliable sources, but not enough to satisfy the notability criteria for an independent article.," subject more than satisfies the notability criteria. On the other hand, one could also reasonably argue that notability comes from the single event of his untimely passing, in which case WP:NOTNEWS becomes a legit concern. As does WP:RECENT. Again, the question being: is the subject only newsworthy/notable because he died so young? In fact, actually no. The subject had a notable minor league career, as shown here and here and several other reliable sources. So a BLP actually could have been written even before his passing. So, it's not like he was just some poor kid who was a nobody until he died too young. AND he was scheduled to make his pro debut with that league just 2 days before he died! That, of course, would have automatically given him notability under NBASE. So while this one was tough, because subject received such widespread coverage in his passing - and had notability prior - I believe this BLP should remain. At minimum, per NBASE, we'd need to include subject in a "short, stub-length bio as a section within the article on the franchise's minor league players." But Keep seems like the right answer. It also happens to be a well-written & extremely well-sourced BLP. Better than many we've narrowly voted to Keep. So with the enormous coverage, prior earned notability and everything else considered, I just don't see that a Delete vote is appropriate here. X4n6 (talk) 12:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
NBASE does not list the Australian league as one of the ones conferring notability!--12.144.5.2 (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. You're right, X4n6. 36.75.179.177 (talk) 14:43, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Strike dupe vote.Onel5969TT me 15:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 36.75.179.177 is clearly not here to contribute to the discussion, so their above "speedy keep" vote ought to also be voided. sixtynine• whaddya want? • 18:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's unfair, if X4n6 were voting 'delete', would you still want to strike his/her vote?
Your first vote counted. You appeared to vote again, so the 2nd was struck. X4n6 (talk) 04:34, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I agree with the comments made above by User:X4n6. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:50, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As noted,X4n6 is incorrect in assuming that the league Costello was about to play in was among those that confer notability to those who play in it.12.144.5.2 (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The next lead paragraph says: "Because the ABL's season takes place from November to February, the ABL is one of baseball's recognised winter leagues (although it is summer in Australia when the season takes place), where often minor league prospects in North America are assigned as an English-speaking alternative to the primary Spanish-speaking Latin America-based winter leagues." And the link to winter leagues lists the ABL: "Currently eight minor leagues with seasons that happen during the "off-season" of Major League Baseball." Finally, under "Organisation" the ABL article states: "The ABL was originally jointly owned by Major League Baseball (75%) and the Australian Baseball Federation (25%) before the ABF became the sole owners prior to the 2016–17 season."
So what becomes clear is that, in it's own right, the ABL is currently an independent, professional baseball league. While at the same time, it is also still being used by MLB as a winter, minor league. As to the IP's legit concern that the ABL isn't listed at NBASE, perhaps that's because, per the article, the ABL has only been wholly owned and separated from the MLB since the 2016-17 season. So it's likely NBASE just needs updating, as per WP:PGCHANGE, WP policies are neither final, nor sacrosanct. So we may need to discuss, on that policy's page, some updating to include the newly independent ABL. Just as we may revise our pages on the ABL and the winter leagues as necessary. But all those are very separate issues from what we're determining here.
With respect to the IP, those discussions don't belong here. Yes, the NBASE doesn't currently include the ABL. But here that doesn't actually matter. Because the subject's notability could still have been established, before his untimely passing and ABL debut, based solely on his minor league notability. Which is totally consistent with NBASE. So IMO, Keep is still the right answer. X4n6 (talk) 01:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As mentioned above, if he were a footballer, his whereabouts in Wikipedia would not be discussed at all. He also played in the Australian main league. --Bodhi-Baum (talk) 07:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He never even played a game in Australia, so why are we having such a huge discussion over the ABL? sixtynine• whaddya want? • 21:54, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. Actually, per NBASE, while playing in those leagues would not itself confer notability, significant "coverage from reliable sources" while playing in those leagues might. X4n6 (talk) 02:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, belated congrats on your recent 10 years on this project! Cheers! X4n6 (talk) 02:09, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
MLB did not divest its share of the ABL because it saw the ABL as becoming a peer...as it continues to use it for player development it clearly sees things otherwise.How much of the coverage of Costello does not relate to his untimely death?...(I am still smarting over the failure to delete the article on the juvenile athlete Ellie Soutter,whose suicide on her 18th birthday was her main notoriety outside her age-bracket niche).--12.144.5.2 (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Whether or not he meets NBASE doesn't matter. What matters is if he meets GNG. I'll say he does, barely. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I felt that the missing element for GNG was sustained coverage. This discussion is likely to end before we can say if coverage would qualify as sustained. BiologicalMe (talk) 15:06, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said in my vote, that doesn't matter. GNG supersedes NBASE. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:03, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GNG isn't supposed to protect people who become famous strictly by their deaths.12.144.5.2 (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly is your definition of GNG in this case? He never played a game in MLB nor the ABL, and his death at all of 23 years old will not lead to sustained coverage and therefore significant expansion of his article that establishes legit notability. And as we all know, death does not establish notability. sixtynine• whaddya want? • 21:54, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sustained coverage is not the threshold. To the contrary, per WP:NTEMP ongoing coverage is not necessary. X4n6 (talk) 08:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - But there is also WP:SUSTAINED to be looked at in the same context. Which would seem to apply in this case.Onel5969TT me 11:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment So can anyone point to serious coverage of him that predates his death?Wikipedia:One event is also relevant.I have no objection to his being covered in the minor league players list for his organization...he just doesn't seem to rate a standalone article.12.144.5.2 (talk) 17:16, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment SUSTAINED actually supports the reasoning in my original Keep. Which is that subject had sufficient notability for a standalone prior to his passing based solely on his minor league career. This BLP could be expanded to include that coverage. Two examples are found here and here. More exists. Even this article following his passing, says he was an All-Star. So merging this BLP into some broader article would invariably mean this content & coverage would be lost. X4n6 (talk) 20:05, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - not sure how you figure that, since 2 of those 3 sources are primary, and the third is about his death, which is kind of the point.Onel5969TT me 00:40, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He was an "All-Star" of the Class-A Midwest League...which is not what All-Star (baseball) redirects to.(And that link notes he was a 31st-round draft picl).12.144.5.2 (talk) 02:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keeping would be consistent with both SUSTAINED and IE. The story about him in the Keene Sentinel was in 2017. The story about him in the Hartford Courant was in 2018. The stories resulting from his death were in 2019. So there has been sustained coverage. And even if his death coverage is IE, the coverage while he was alive had nothing to do with that event, so there is no IE problem either. Rlendog (talk) 15:04, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete when X4n6 argued in their !keep rationale that the subject had a notable playing career, the evidence provided was an MiLB article about the subject's death and a link to the Fangraphs stats page for Costello. The MiLB.com article does not establish notability and any minor leaguer can have a Fangraphs page. The evidence provided here is all routine coverage. Unless there is better evidence, I'm firmly in support of deletion as the subject fails both GNG and NBASE. Lepricavark (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Two of the sources I provided are MLB.com, on September 11, 2018 and the official site of the MLB's minor league team on July 14, 2018. I am unaware of the MLB being challenged as a RS or not passing PSTS. While the third article simply noted subject's All-Star status to further establish his notable minor league career and the coverage which likely accompanied it. And I was clear these examples, were neither definitive nor exhaustive. But users are certainly welcome to review what appears to be the 713 articles on the subject which appear on Newspapers.com. Many likely relate to his passing and others are likely incidental. The balance likely relate to his career. It also excludes magazines, tv interviews or other media. Ultimately, all this Sturm und Drang is ironic considering that had he died 48 hours later, he would have made his pro debut rendering all this moot. But having no effect on the career he had to get there. I'll also note subject easily passes BASIC and undeniably, many standalone BLPs exist on this project with far less coverage or notability. X4n6 (talk) 03:43, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ultimately, all this Sturm und Drang is ironic considering that had he died 48 hours later, he would have made his pro debut rendering all this moot. No, having appeared in the ABL would not have caused Costello to pass NBASE; that argument has already been debunked above. Moreover, minor league baseball is in fact professional, so his pro career had already begun in 2017, as stated in our article. I was not challenging the reliability of MLB.com (or, in this case, MiLB.com), so that portion of your comment is a red herring. If there really are 713 articles on this subject, you should be able to link some that are not either routine nor related to his death. Lepricavark (talk) 16:07, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you go back and do some re-reading. "Debunked?""Red Herring?" My goodness. Perhaps you've been watching too much impeachment coverage. The fact is, I said a discussion to update NBASE to include the recently independent ABL might be a good thing. And it might. I also expressly said that it was an entirely separate issue from this vote. Further, of course minor leaguers are pros. But NBASE treats them differently than it treats Nippon or KBO. That was/is the point. And my MLB.com response was actually directed to the user comment above yours, so you can retract your fangs. But frankly, the one thing that has been "debunked" and is a "red herring" is that any of this matters. Because as Muboshgu correctly pointed out: GNG supersedes NBASE. But hey, it is much prettier in green! As for the articles on Newspaper.com, it's not my job to do your homework for you. I've already provided you with one resource where you could check and see what you would find there. But I'm not writing this BLP. I'm merely saying it should exist. Regarding that, I also noticed your attempted point-by-point refutation failed to refute that subject also easily passes BASIC. Likely because even you must know he does. Both GNG and BASIC supersede NBASE. (Perhaps I should have put that in green.) X4n6 (talk) 09:29, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I pointed out that there is no reason to read the ABL's independence as meaning its status was being upgraded,as opposed to being regarded as less strategic by MLB.And you haven't refuted the "one event" nature of the bulk of Costello's press.--12.144.5.2 (talk) 13:34, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your claim re: the ABL, vis-à-vis the MLB's supposed "strategic"-ness, is as unsupported as it is irrelevant. Also, before claiming what I "haven't refuted," perhaps direct your efforts to "refuting" my last statement. That both GNG & BASIC supersede NBASE. I'll wait. X4n6 (talk) 00:21, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, he also passes 1E. X4n6 (talk) 04:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, he was signed to a MLB team — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.144.213.202 (talk • contribs)
By that token you (205.144.213.202,you didn't sign) could say anyone under contract would count,even a last-in-draft Rookie League player?--12.144.5.2 (talk) 04:35, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He was close to making the majors. I have seen articles on top prospects. He may have been drafted low, but he was involved in a major-league trade.Pbrower2a (talk) 20:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As a baseball player, he reached the same level as all those teammates and opponents we naturally ignore, despite their routine coverage in sports pages. His general claim to fame is dying in a hotel room, like a normal person on the road (remember the famous American list of dead Dominican Republic tourists this summer?). Either way, not enough, even combined. InedibleHulk(talk) 04:00, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Notability isn't about level, it is about coverage. If the teammates we ignore got significant coverage we could have an article about them, regardless of whether Costello has an article. And if Costello got significant coverage (which he did), the fact that his teammates don't have articles is irrelevant to whether Costello should. Rlendog (talk) 12:55, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If the coverage is about his death,it doesn't speak to his notability.--12.144.5.2 (talk) 17:26, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, there are multiple reliable sources that provided significant coverage of Costello before his death. Secondly, if his death generates coverage about him in significant sources that does speak to his notability, since most people who die don't get coverage about them or their death. So the fact that multiple sources chose to wrote stories about Costello upon his death does "speak to his notability."Rlendog (talk) 14:59, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Firstly, Costello was neither a Top Prospect nor was he technically "close to making the majors" as the jump from AA to the MLB is still a pretty significant step. Secondly, with the exception of his death the coverage is pretty routine for a minor leaguer (high school and college coverage, game reports, "local boy doing well", etc.). Thirdly, the leagues that are included in WP:NBASE were chosen because of the level of play and to be frank the ABL is currently not nearly high enough to be considered for an inclusionary standard. Best, GPL93 (talk) 04:40, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This vote thread has obviously been longer than usual, so it's understandable that many will TLDR their way thru most of it. But given that the last two votes were based on the same presumptions, they need addressing. Subject wasn't just a poor kid who toiled in baseball oblivion whose only claim to fame was dying. It's counter-intuitive that an insignificant player's death would garner such international coverage. The coverage itself also rejects that notion. Subject was actually having a significant minor league ALL-STAR career[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8] at the time of his passing. This entire AfD is based on NBASE, which his notability clearly passes. But it ignores GNG and BASIC, which supersede NBASE and which his career and the international coverage clearly pass. But it seems most Delete votes aren't aware of the totality of the coverage, a good amount of which did occur before his death. So it would be a shame if this caused a NO CONSENSUS conclusion, or an undeserved deletion. X4n6 (talk) 11:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are hundreds of minor leaguers selected to play in all-star games every year and he followed that up by hitting .223 the following season. He wasn't toiling away, but he wasn't exactly a rising prospect either. And again, the coverage outside his death is routine for a minor league baseball player. Best, GPL93 (talk) 12:55, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Can you discuss within the context of the specific policies of NBASE regarding minor league players; and the rules of GNG and BASIC, which again, apply over NBASE; why you believe this BLP doesn't meet them? Feel free to quote any applicable sections. X4n6 (talk) 22:46, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes GNG per significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Even if we discount all the international coverage of his death by stretching BLP1E, he also had significant stories about him such as those in the Hartford Courant and Keene Sentinel that are referenced in the article. Rlendog (talk) 14:51, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's routine local sports coverage. Features rather than game recaps, but still, the stories are clearly about him playing baseball at a level beneath that required for a standalone bio here. And nothing else. In one Courant reference, he's just mentioned in a story starring Andrew Hinckley, who has no article for surviving. InedibleHulk(talk) 06:10, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
They are features, not routine sports coverage. That the features are about him playing below the major leagues does not make them routine. There is no level that is "required for a standalone bio here." NSPORTS lists levels at which players are presumed to be notable but it does not exclude players at lower levels who meet GNG. Which Costello does. And just because Courant mentioned him in a story about someone else doesn't discount the significant coverage Courant gave Costello in a feature about him. Rlendog (talk) 12:52, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Choice of feature story subjects is largely arbitary,while notability guidelines are useless unless consistent.--12.144.5.2 (talk) 17:28, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. Not discounting Costello's local player profile, just counting Hinckley's for contrast. What has Ryan that Andrew hasn't? InedibleHulk(talk) 05:03, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." But this isn't an either/or since, if you disagree, you're free to write Andrew's article. X4n6 (talk) 10:36, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Choice of feature story subjects indicates that the source believes that there is something notable to say about the subject. If you believe that "notability guidelines are useless unless consistent" then I assume you support keeping since this level of coverage has consistently resulted in keeping articles. Rlendog (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While it fails WP:NBASE it passes WP:GNG with the significant coverage in the Hartford Courant and Keene Sentinel. An SNG does not trump GNG.4meter4 (talk) 04:11, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
When one guideline says playing in the minors isn't good enough, and the coverage exclusively signifies a guy as a minor leaguer, that significant coverage isn't good enough. Same goes for dying in one event. The content of the sources disqualify this article more than their existence qualifies it. All we can and do build from them is a biography of a player who almost reached a level that might have guaranteed a Wikipedia stub, but died before that could ever happen. Self-evidently should not be, as is. InedibleHulk(talk) 04:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
NBASE sure as hell doesn't say playing in the minors isn't good enough. So since the basis of your argument is false, everything else built on it also fails. And you're still making NBASE and 1E arguments when folks have already said subject passes GNG. So regardless of NBASE once GNG applies, as they say, that's your ballgame.
Finally, Derrico Dayevondre Harris, Johntel Thomas, Luke Brown, Isaac Powner, Parker Killian Moore and Alyssa Jacobson all have something in common with Costello. They all died recently, at 23 years old. As tragic as any life gone too young is, they each got only brief local coverage. So we really need to stop this nonsense that Costello was notable just for dying at 23. Otherwise we have at least six more articles to write. X4n6 (talk) 12:19, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing NBASE says "playing in the minors isn't good enough" for is that playing in the minors does not get a presumption of notability in the absence of showing evidence of significant coverage. It is a serious misreading of the guideline to say that NBASE suggests that minor league players have any less claim to notability than anyone else when significant coverage exists. Rlendog (talk) 14:54, 27 November 2019 (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.