Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Haslingden

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. Daniel Bryant 10:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Haslingden[edit]

delete - 74th in a single Olympic event seems doubtful notability - Tiswas^(t/c) 00:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete- Unless there's some other significance to this person's life which has not been adequately expressed on the page (and why wouldn't it be?) ParvatiBai 00:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No third-party sources. Ab e g92contribs 00:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. Aren't all Olympians inherently notable? Eddie.willers 01:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
deleteGman124 01:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete Wow 74th. He needed one big Act of God~~ ==> Change to Keep. Olympian.--ZayZayEM 14:8, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete Doesn't appear to be notable from what's stated. Hello32020 02:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for failing WP:BIO ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 02:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sure, Olympians have inherent notability, but 74^th? I think not. Hornandsoccer ^Talk 03:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Being selected to represent Australia at the Olympics is a sufficient proof of notability. WP:BIO lists as one of its criteria: "Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports." Placing 74th does not take away from that accomplishment. --Eastmain 03:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Eastmain. --Evan Seeds (talk)(contrib.) 03:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Eddie 'the Eagle' Edwards lost badly at the Olympics. But he also became well-known and had some semblance of fame. Does the subject? ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 04:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep per WP:BIO Orderinchaos 05:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per WP:BIO and precedent of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lecomte. In the case of Lecomte, an Olympic athlete's article was kept merely because he was an Olympic athlete, even though not even his first name was known. --Metropolitan90 06:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Athletic prowess or lack thereof should be pretty much irrelevant. If Haslingden is the subject of multiple reliable sources, he meets Wikipedia's primary notability criterion. I have found one: ABC, if there are any more, this should be kept. If Olympians are inherently notable, then performance at the Olympics should also not be relevant. --Canley 08:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Canley 08:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't know. 74th? I get the feeling that that is not within the intended results of WP:BIO as it applies to sportspeople, even if it does appear to be within the letter. Lankiveil 09:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. Even though he finished 74th, the people at the Olympics Wikiproject are trying to haave the names listed on this subject for all competitors at the Olympic Games. If you look at the coverage of some of the other events, you can see this. Even though they Mr. Haslingden finished 74th in the men's 18 km event, it is still listed in the official Olympic report for the 1952 Winter Olympics in Oslo. Additionally, there may be Wikipedia users in Australia who have more information on this athelete and can fill out information. Chris 11:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep part 2. Haslindgen also competed in the 50 km event at those same games though he did not finish. The source for this event is also listed in the article as well. Chris 13:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's no higher level in sports than the Olympics. JBEvans 14:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete. This article could have been crafted as an example of why not all Olympians are notable. A single competitor in one Olympic discipline in one games is clearly not notable as a sportsman. Sam Blacketer 14:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep with latest sourcing and revisions. Sam Blacketer 08:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BIO. Coming in such a dismally low place in a single competition may not seem very notable to you or I, but the fact of the matter is he represented his country at the Olympics, and that alone satisfies one of the "special cases" : Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports. I have issues with "notability" because it is so ill-defined and subjective but in this case the guideline is pretty clear-cut. Arkyan  ^(talk) 14:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Not targeting this comment at you in particular, but this line of argument has two problems. Firstly WP:BIO is a guideline and not policy. Secondly, even if it was, the heading of the list reads "This list is only a guideline, and should not be used an absolute test of notability; each article should stand or fall on its own merits". Merely because a subject comes into a class mentioned in WP:BIO does not mean that the article must automatically be notable. Sam Blacketer 15:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's only a guideline, and you bring up valid points. While it should not be used as an absolute test, I feel that if certain "special cases" merit mention in the guideline they should generally be considered acceptable inclusion criteria except in cases where there is some compelling reason to ignore the guideline. Unfortunately situations like this are prone to circular logic - "Guideline says that X is a special case of notability, but guideline also says there is no absolute test of notability". It's all going to be a case of interpretation, naturally, but my interpretation is that if an article satisfies one of the "special cases" then I will assume notability unless there is exceptional reason to ignore the guideline. Arkyan  ^(talk) 16:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, for three reasons. First, competing at the Olympic Games satisfies our criteria for notability because the person would have competed at the highest level in amateur sports. Unless we introduce a stricter criteria for notability of sports figures, then this is sufficient. Second, we have had several similar articles up for AfD before and they have all survived. There is nothing to indicate we should change precedent now. Third, a cross-country skiier from Australia has to be somewhat rare, and notable for that alone. Andrwsc 15:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Somehow it seems like there's a common misconception that an athlete can compete in an Olympic event without having any other achievements to speak of. The article needs to be expanded, but one does not reach the Olympics by a whim. He has competed at the highest level of amateur sports. Leebo ^T/C 15:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-As said above, though he finished 74th, he had to do something major before that to get into the Olympics. That part needs to be found and added. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 17:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - - as per WP:BIO, he has competed at the highest level in his sport. The guideline doesn't say "... and won stuff or came really close". -- Whpq 17:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BIO. I am sure an Australian Olympian is more than just WP:CRUFT, which is the alternative in this case. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 17:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He was an Olympian. His place in the event is irrelevant. The only fact that matters is that he represented his country at the highest ametuer level. --Cyrus Andiron 17:51, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BIO. --Fang Aili ^talk 17:54, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, though he wasn't very close in placing, even participating in the Olympics is something that most of us won't even accomplish. A simple cleanup/expand tag on this article would have sufficed. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 22:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I did not care what country Mr. Haslingden was from, just that he competed. Besides, he has two stub tabs already calling for the expansion of the article, one from Australia and the other for winter sports. I do this all the time with my articles if I think they need to be expanded. Chris 22:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep he has participated in the Olympics and there are sources to prove that. He most definitely had to have some success in his career to represent Australia in the Olympics. Subject meets WP:BIO. —Anas ^talk? 23:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Haslingden was Australia's first cross-country representative at the Olympics together with Cedric Sloan. [1]He would have had to performed well in trials and other events to have been selected. Capitalistroadster 02:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Would it be possible for editors with knowledge on the matter to prove the subject's notability by expanding and sourcing his article? ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 02:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. People are focusing on "74th". What matters is that he presumably finished first, second, or third in the Australian Olympic trials. I agree with the editors who say that all Olympians are notable. JamesMLane t c 03:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Competing at the Olympics is a nice, clear-cut criteria for inclusion. Otherwise, we get into messy arguments about how good is good enough. And competing at the Olympics isn't something you just do one afternoon (even with the notoriously incompetent athletes). Andjam 03:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comment Yes, Australia didn't do very well at the sport at that Olympics (though I don't think any seagulls were actually killed). Australia came second last and last (excluding DNFs). But it still isn't cruft. Andjam 04:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nobody is adding to the article or expanding it or making any serious assertion that the subject could warrant a full article. Maybe the information should be merged into something relevant. Considering how many people get sent to the Olympics, the idea that every single one should have their own article (despite the fact they may have done nothing else of note) is a trifle ridiculous. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 05:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have expanded the article from sources. As the 1952 Winter Olympics was Australia's first Winter Olympics, he was a pioneering Winter Olympian. It is generally agreed that Olympic participation is sufficient for competing in the highest levels of the sport as specified by WP:BIO. It might be appropriate to merge with Australia at the 1952 Winter Olympics but there is strong sentiment for a standalone article.Capitalistroadster 07:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Actually, this was Australia's second Winter Olympics, though it was the first time it sent a team rather than a sole Olympian. Andjam 01:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It has been mentioned that notability is satisfied according to the guideline "Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports." Do we know what the minimum achievement was for qulaification? Is it possible that Haslingden was a shoo-in? This would surely diminish any claim to notability, inasmuch as it diminishes any notion of him being a bonafide competitor. The abc.net article alludes to the fact that it required minimal achievement on his behalf to qualify. - Tiswas^(t/c) 09:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If he's an olympian he should be in. Do you want to have a thousand of these discussions over the coming years deciding which olympian should be in and which shouldn't be? Does eighteenth in the 1952 fencing count etc? So much time would be wasted. If someone's an Olympian then he or she is notable. It's the same with first class cricketers etc. It's an encyclopedia and we're not going to run out of paper. He should be in. Nick mallory 10:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article is sourced (well, for a short article!) and passes WP:BIO, so I don't see much of a problem with Keep-ing it. Nihiltres 12:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep (vote change) I still think the argument "all Olympic athletes ever should have their own article" is just a license to create crap stubs and leave them unmaintained until an AFD. But the expansion (and sourcing) explains why the man could be considered a notable in Australian sports history. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 14:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You could use any notability criterion to "create a crap stub." If you're simply expressing a pessimistic outlooks toward stub expansion, it applies to other areas besides athletes too. Leebo ^T/C 14:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nearly 11,100 competitors at Athens 2004. 2,633 at the 2006 Winter Olympics. Do all of those need an article? Bearing in mind there have been 25 Summer and Winter Games. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 15:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No one said that we were close to finishing the encyclopedia. I hope we don't start excluding subjects for the sake of saving ourselves the work. No one is requiring you to make those articles, but the athletes are notable and thus shouldn't be deleted. For comparison, we have about 1.7 million articles in total, and species are considered notable enough to have their own articles -- yet there are many millions more species than we currently have articles on all subjects combined. This doesn't render any given species non-notable, and it also doesn't mean you have to devote time to creating species articles if you'd like to work on other things. Leebo ^T/C 15:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another comment Sure you can't google an awful lot about him right now, but once old issues of newspapers get digitized we could yet see a featured article written about him. Andjam 01:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep For him to make it to the Olympics means he qualified somewhere... Which makes him nationally quite competitive. Meets WP:BIO as it is currently written. He's at least as notable as Book Book. Garrie 04:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey, I just noticed... he was in Australia's first Winter Olympic team from Australia and you want to delete the article?Ga rr ie
Keep Is notable as the first Australian to compete in cross country skiing at the Winter Olympics. Sarah 07:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Andrwsc. Parutakupiu ^{talk || contribs} 18:15, 12 April 2007 (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.