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 delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Garcia[edit]

Stephen Garcia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Non-notable high school athlete, nominated as violating WP:BIO Mhking 05:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For one thing Stephen Garcia is a notable high school athelete. He is a quarterback which is a highly important and highly sought after position. He is also ranked very high in all of the football recruiting polls and is ranked the third quarterback in several polls. Fans from all of the mentioned schools also show great interest in Stephen because he will make such an impact on the team he chooses to play for. He is also considering graduation early which will no longer make him a high school athlete and he has scheduled a conference to announce his college decision on Wednesday.

Smellslikebrett— Smellslikebrett (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Keep I personally think that the Stephen Garcia page is notable because it describes a valid college prospect who is thinking of playing at South Carolina. Having this page available would allow South Carolina Gamecock fans to learn about the prospect easily through Wikipedia. mas29— mas29 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Comment the above vote was made by 72.159.148.3, who has voted below as well. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 18:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Never mind, didn't know that's a shared IP address. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 18:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't care about Stephen Garcia, but he is important to other people in SC.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by VlaDude91 (talk • contribs).— VlaDude91 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Delete as a high school athlete. Once he actually signs with a college and joins the team, perhaps he will be notable enough. Montco 05:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete He has not been drafted by any college team yet. Someday he may be notable but presently he does not meet WP:BIO.--Dakota 05:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete; also, delete Stephen Garcia "The college prospect". I don't know why that page was made. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 06:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, in agreement with Mhking. LastChanceToBe 06:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable 74.241.140.49 06:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above (due to lack of a college recruitment). Also, so above IP address because IP addresses can't vote for AfD. Bearly541 07:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It looks like an IP, but it isn't. Click on the link; that's a bona fide user. I already told him to change his username through WP:CHU. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 07:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[[reply]
    • Even if he was an unregistered user, he would still be allowed to submit his recommendation in an AfD: "Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their recommendations may be discounted, especially if they seem to be made in bad faith (for example, if they misrepresent their reasons). Conversely, the opinions of logged in users whose accounts predate the article's AfD nomination are given more weight." See WP:AFD. --Metropolitan90 16:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable person. Danny Lilithborne 21:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This article should be considered because of the time when the player will be legitimate. The author of this page should be allowed to re-edit the page when he is signed.

Smellslikebrett 18:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non-notable. By the article's standards, I've had a high school math teacher with just as much notability. -WarthogDemon 21:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Article has been speedied several times (by me and others), and same author keeps reposting it. NawlinWiki 03:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete and Salt the Earth if possible.SkierRMH,07:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the article is notable as the player will have signed with a team within a few days.

72.159.148.3 18:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This person is notable as he is a top high school football prospect, and he is notable to fans of the schools at which he is being recruited, who are anticipating him being part of the institution's team. Perhaps those who believe that he is not notable do not follow NCAA football. Drpaynemontgomery 18:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)— Drpaynemontgomery (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Comment users saying he will be notable once he is "drafted" obviously do not know anything about NCAA football because prospects are signed, not drafted. "Delete per above (due to lack of a college recruitment). Also, so above IP address because IP addresses can't vote for AfD. Bearly541 07:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)" A lack of college recruitment? He is being recruited by the best teams in the country! Drpaynemontgomery 18:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)— Drpaynemontgomery (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. . I am a new user who is a Southeastern Conference football fan and happened to stumble across this article. I don't see that comment's relevance to the topic. Drpaynemontgomery 18:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I assume you mean the comment about your lack of edits. The relevance is that many times, people tell their (like-minded) friends to go vote on an AfD, which leads to a rush of people all voting one way and causes the appearance of a consensus where there is none. By tagging new user accounts this way, we can notify any closing admin of such suspected accounts. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 19:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The user that created the "Delete" comment earlier should obviously do some research before he criticizes the quality of the article. Furthermore, Stephen is looking at some of the top colleges in the nation. Seven out of the ten teams were ranked in the 2006 season, and five of those teams were ranked in the top ten at some point this season. I personally would consider those teams in the top of the country. Stephen Garcia was also looking at Ohio State and Michigan, but Michigan selected another quarterback and Ohio State was not looking for one. Another part of his decision lies in the history of Steve Spurrier and his fine coaching ability. This is signifigant in his career and his future with the team he chooses. There is more value in the early recognition of athletes. This is reflected in many things including the increased value of rookie paraphenelia of high impact athletes. It would give other wikipedians a sense of pride to know that we, as a wikipedia community recognized this fine young athlete before other sources.

Smellslikebrett 19:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Comment Which user? If you're talking about my suggestion to delete a different article, that's because it was essentially a duplicate of this one, which is unnecessary. And why do you presume to know what would give other Wikipedians a sense of pride if you've only had an account for four days? Also, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 19:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:BIO at this point.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Whpq (talk • contribs) 12:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comment First of all, I at no point commented on the "crystal ball" like powers that you mention. Secondly, your opinion is no better than mine unless you live in some other little world where you worship yourself because you have underlying insecurities. You should consider respecting the other wikipedia members instead of trying to chastise them.

Smellslikebrett 01:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Please remain civil and refrain from personal attacks. And I never stated my opinion is better than yours, I merely asked why you think you can know what would please the entire Wikipedia community if you've only been a member for a few days. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 01:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'm no longer concerned with the results of this silly deletion poll. It does not matter because Stephen Garcia will commit to a college football team of notable status on Thursday December 7, 2006, in a conference at Jefferson Senior High School at either 11:00 am or 1:00 pm. After this official announcement your argument that he is not notable will be unjustifiable. The WP:Bio states that "Articles about first team squad members who have not made a first team appearance may also be appropriate, but only if the individual is at a club of sufficient stature that most members of its squad are worthy of articles." All of the teams that Stephen Garcia is looking at playing for have multiple notable athletes. Also Stephen Garcia is included in multiple published resources including several newpapers and a few magazines. He also meets the criterion for the "Search Engine Test -- Does a search for the subject produce a large number of distinguishable hits on Google ([1]), Alexa ([2]), Yahoo! ([3] or other well-known Internet search engine?" I am in no way closely related to Stephen Garcia nor have I ever met him. All of the information will almost certainly be verifiable in the future because of the high chance of professional acheivements in football. Especially under coaching from Steve Spurrier. Stephen Garcia even passes the criterion for "Notable Actors and Television Personalities" as he has a rather large fan base. (from South Carolina Gamecock fans). There are several videos of fans who drove hundreds of miles to Tampa, Florida to see him play in a High school game. He also gets signifigant local media attention, having his own section on the "Tampa Bay Online" website, www.TBO.com. This article could also be written into the "perfect article". It's subject (Stephen Garcia) will almost undoubtably be successful and is a very interesting person. He also shares a good deal of information about himself and his family with the public and would likely provide additional information in the future. As you can probably tell by now (or at least tommorrow at 1:00 PM, there is little if no sense in continuing the comments on this page. This page will be valid soon. I will also re-edit this page once Stephen Garcia has signed to make it more accurate in such ways as deleting the section about his college decision and adding a section about his future with his new team.

Smellslikebrett 01:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 'search engine test' is a proposed criterion, not an actual one. The South Carolina Gamecock fan base is probably not large enough to qualify. The significant local media attention is just that: local. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 01:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Further arguing concerning the notability of this article will be pointless. Veinor and Smellslikebrett have both presented their arguments which probably were already recognized by interested wikipedia members. Therefore, additional bickering is of no consequence.

• IT IS OFFICIAL STEPHEN GARCIA HAS COMMITTED TO SOUTH CAROLINA AND SHOULD NOW BE CONSIDERED AS A NOTABLE ATHLETE BECAUSE OF HIS STATUS ON A NOTBALE COLLEGE TEAM. ALSO, please do not defile the Gamecock nation Veinor. It is extremely insulting to question our allegiance. THANK YOU

Smellslikebrett 18:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • A: Do you have a source? B: I never questioned your allegiance, I questioned the size. Do you have reliable estimates for the size? Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 02:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'm not yet advocating in one direction or another on this, but to repeat from above, the standard for this person to meet is "first team squad members who have not made a first team appearance". To be on the first team for USC, this person would need to be named the starting quarterback. I'm not aware of any coverage indicating that this individual meets this standard. I think that there may be room for allowing articles for particularly noteworthy recruits, but that standard should be particularly high. ScottW 03:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Anyone who knows me knows I fight for football player articles to be kept. But even this one I cannot. First, he isn't in the top ten for recruiting in his position in the nation. Second, WP:BIO states they must have played as a college athlete to warrant an article. I'd be happy to recreate this article once he plays. Also, the article is so horrible as it's just about him going to sign with South Carolina that it would just need to be blanked and started over. See ya in a few years kid. --MECU≈talk 03:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The starting quarterback for South Carolina may be notable but one they just signed out of high school is not. Eluchil404 08:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. NN. WMMartin 16:43, 8 December 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.