Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Kish

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 keep. v/r - T P 00:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Kish[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Fails WP:NSPORT. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While there is no specific NSPORTS standard for wrestling, Kish is the fourth head coach in the history of the North Dakota State wrestling program. At age 28, he's the youngest head coach in any sport at any NCAA Division I program. He was a two-time All-American and twice placed as the runner-up at the NCAA championship. He's received non-trivial coverage in mainstream media sources. A google search for "Roger Kish" turns up 10,000 hits, and a google news archive search turns up 600 hits. Many of these appear to constitute non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. I've added a few to the article. His coaching career is just getting started, but his overall accomplishments and news coverage strike me as sufficient to pass WP:GNG. Cbl62 (talk) 02:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cbl62's reasoning and sources. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The statement that the individual lacks reliable sources per an entire guideline page, WP:NSPORT, doesn't provide any specific rationale for deletion of the article, and exists as a generic, blanket statement without any form of actual qualification. Referring to entire pages of guidelines fails to qualify specific reasons for notability or lack thereof, and equates to referring to an entire list of multiple, specific rationales as a singular, generic rationale for article deletion. This logic equates to stating that an article should be deleted because of any reason on a guideline page. These types of illogical qualifications and arguments are absolutely invalid, and exist as the logical fallacy of hasty generalization. Specific examples from guideline pages are valid and should be considered. Northamerica1000 (talk) 05:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The WP:NSPORT criteria the nominator should have been referring to is WP:NCOLLATH and the subject has been demonstrated to meet clause 3 of that section (well-known assistant coach [who has] gained national media attention as an individual, not just as a player for a notable team.). ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 23:31, 12 September 2011 (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.