Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Powell

:{{la|Alice Powell}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Powell}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|Alice Powell}})

Notability is not currently established in the article, and as it stands the subject appears to fail Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Motorsports. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 14:52, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

• Keep - Notable driver per WP:N and WP:ATHLETE. May have wanted to check [http://www.google.com/search?q=Alice+Powell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=Alice+Powell&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn&fp=84f34ab5383c7ee9 Google News] before nominating. Just because it's a stub doesn't mean that the subject isn't notable. I should also add that there was plenty of content previously that claimed and established notability but I had to remove it because it was a copyvio. A glance at the page's history would have shown that. OlYeller^Talktome 16:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• The burden is not on me to prove the subject's notability. Article as it was definitely didn't do so. I still believe the subject fails WP:ATHLETE per rule 1 under motorsports, unless BARC Formula Renault is considered a fully-professional series (given the claim in the first source in the article that the subject is still a student, I doubt this). Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 16:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• Actually, when you nominate it for AfD, you're claiming that the subject isn't notable implying that you've done research to make that claim unless you make claims based on no evidence whatsoever. That's the fundamental difference between CSD and AfD. Don't take my word for it. Read points 2, 9, and 10 of Wikipedia:BEFORE#Before_nominating_an_article_for_deletion which point out that the history should have been checked and at least a small attempt at finding sources should have been made. We can continue this discussion on my talk page if you really feel like we need to but it's not important to this discussion so I won't be discussing it here any further. OlYeller^Talktome 16:28, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• Considering I still think the subject fails athlete notability guidelines, it's a moot point. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 16:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• That's fair. I think she satisfies point #1 for driving in the British Formula Renault Championship but that's more my opinion on what constitutes "fully professional series" than anything. Regardless, the significant coverage by multiple reliable and independent sources as well as being the youngest female driver in a Formula Renault race are enough for me. OlYeller^Talktome 17:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• Did you miss the part about it being an amateur race? Toddst1 (talk) 01:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• In my opinion, "amateur" events of this level qualify as being on the professional level but ignoring the several references that provide significant coverage is of questionable logic. Conceding that the race isn't professional doesn't really change anything. OlYeller^Talktome 16:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep - There is significant coverage in multiple reliable sources about different events. ~~ GB fan ~~ 16:45, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

:What does that have to do with anything? Toddst1 (talk) 01:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

::Significant coverage in multiple reliable sources has everything to do with notability. There are specific guidelines such as Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Motorsports and she fails all 7 of those criteria for presumed notability. When you look towards the top of that same page, Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Basic criteria, it says: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." The references currently in the article show that Powell has been the subject of multiple published non-trvial secondary sources. Those sources, BBC and The Times, are reliable. The references are not just regurgitations of the same story, so they are intellectually independent. The Times and BBC are not associated with Powell so they are independent of the subject. So based on this even though she does not meet Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Motorsports she does meet the Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Basic criteria and is notable. ~~ GB fan ~~ 02:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

:::I think you misunderstand the guidelines. Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Basic criteria provides bright-line guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to meet the General Notability Guideline. The subject of this article meets general notability, but not the specific notability requirements. Take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (wine topics). Most wineries meet the general notability requirements, but we don't have articles on most wineries because the more specific criteria apply. Toddst1 (talk) 04:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

::::WP:ATHLETE#Applicable policies and guidelines says "Subjects that do not meet the sport-specific criteria outlined in this guideline may still be notable if they meet the General Notability Guideline or another subject specific notability guideline." So this applies since she does not meet the sport specific guideline but she does meet the general notability guideline as I explained above. ~~ GB fan ~~ 04:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

:::::In my opinion, satisfying one inclusion guideline but not another doesn't mean that the subject is not notable. Is this concept in the notability guidelines and I've somehow missed it? Can you please cite it or copy some text over? I tried to find it but there's so much to go through that I finally gave up. Please don't think this is some passive aggressive attempt to prove you wrong. If I've missed something, I want to learn about and correct my mistake. OlYeller^Talktome 16:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
• Delete: subject fails all 7 criteria for Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Motorsports. The British Formula Renault Championship is an amateur race so she fails #1, doesn't come close to any of the others. Just because there is coverage about her doesn't mean she passes the criteria. Those Keep votes clearly haven't read the relevant policy. Toddst1 (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

:I guess when you say that I clearly haven't read the relevant policy you are referring to the notability guideline WP:ATHLETE since you didn't mention any policies. I have read it and I based my recommendations on the relevant portion of that guideline. Maybe you should assume good faith rather than accusing people of things. ~~ GB fan ~~ 04:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

• Note: WT:MOTOR has been notified. Strange Passerby (talk • c • status) 07:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Worth noting that it was established at WT:MOTOR that the Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Motorsports guidelines are insufficient for many cases, as they mainly apply to American-based series. We discussed setting our own guidelines, but these were never quite established. Many did suggest that each situation should be judged on a case-by-case basis. I feel that judging whether a driver is notable enough depends on A) their acheivements and B) the coverage they have received. Alice Powell here certainly meets B), as she has had articles in The Times written about her. However, she has only had this article because she is a female racer, and not because of her acheivements. I feel that Formula Renault UK is a notable enough series, but only if you have won it, or maybe been a frontrunner on a regular basis. You can see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Formula_Renault_UK_season#Driver_standings here] that Alice only managed a best result of 10th in her only season in the category to date. The BARC series she is racing in this year is far more obscure that the main series. Considering these points, I would say Delete. - mspete93 09:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Note - I feel like the discussion may have switched from focusing on the subject's notability to whether or not the subject satisfies WP:ATHLETE#Motorsports. Regardless of any of my opinions regarding the subject of the article, I think we may need to focus on the goal. The article has recently seen some changes as well that participants may want to review. OlYeller^Talktome 16:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep. The subject clearly passes the general notability guideline as demonstrated by the sources in the article. There is nothing in policy or guidelines that suggects that there is any need to pass any additional guideline. Yes, a 30-year-old man with the same achievements probably wouldn't have received the same coverage, but it is not part of our remit to look into the reasons why a subject has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:00, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep The reliable sources presented establish general notability guidelines in this instance for the subject, regardless of what a condescending admin says. Vodello (talk) 22:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep The sources provided here about the subject support the claim of notability. Alansohn (talk) 12:44, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep Although Powell may fail the criteria at WP:ATHLETE, she passes the criteria of WP:GNG. What this says is that, although she may not yet be a notable athlete, she is a notable person based on the amount of significant independent coverage she has received. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep agree meets WP:GNG Infinitely Humble (talk) 23:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

: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.