Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jake Noll

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jake Noll (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)

Not notable per WP:GNG or WP:BASEBALL. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I argue that this young man, who is one of the top-rated college players in the nation, deserves to have his article kept as:

A) He is projected to be a high draft pick this upcoming year.

B) There is little point in deleting his article as, should he be drafted as high as his college success and experts suggest he will, he will likely merit, at the very least, a merge to his team's minor league page.

C) His accomplishments thus far in his collegiate career set the basis for a notability; his honors are unique and notable. Few persons are Freshman Players of the Year, for example. His achievements, not bestowed upon him by obscure sources but by nationally recognized publications, merit consideration. Alex (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• • • A) see WP:CRYSTAL, B) see WP:TOOSOON, C), see WP:GNG and WP:BASE/N. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete College baseball does not have the same media following of football and basketball. Also, unlike those sports, most draft picks spend many years in the minors before reaching the Majors, if ever. Therefore, I don't think being a highly rated prospect counts for much - might be different if he were say top-5, but he just makes the top 100, meaning about a projected 4th round draft pick. While he has some college achievements, nothing high enough to bring in WP:NCOLLATH far as I can see. With all that, no reason to presume sources exist to satisfy WP:GNG and therefore sources must be shown. I am not seeing the appropriate sources, so delete. RonSigPi (talk) 19:21, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per Muboshgu and RonSigPi.--Yankees10 20:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as too soon, not yet solidly satisfying the applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 05:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lacks the significant independent non-routine coverage required to meet WP:GNG and doesn't yet meet WP:NBASEBALL. At best article was created WP:TOOSOON. Mdtemp (talk) 17:33, 3 March 2016 (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.