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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Hudson Taylor IV[edit]

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

Non-notable college athlete. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 02:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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)).

Keep Time2evolve (talk) 08:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)See below comment — Time2evolve (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep: Hudson Taylor is currently the most historic wrestler in the University of Maryland's history. The institution has an important role in Division I collegiate athletics; and its athletic program is one of the largest and most successful in the United States. The wrestling team is ranked top-ten in the country and has a very famous head coach. Hudson holds records for career pins and wins at the University of Maryland. This is very significant. In 2008, Hudson became the second All-American in the sport in three decades at the University of Maryland; and, in 2009 Hudson became only the fourth repeat all-American in Maryland history. Additionally, Hudson is currently among the top-ten in all-time NCAA history (including Divisions I,II, and III)for career pinning. He is famous among the wrestling community for his pinning talent. As of January 2010, Hudson is en-route, with less than ten pins remaining, to become top-four all-time NCAA pinners. He is also top-three NCAA pinners in the last quarter century. These facts makes him a very noteworthy historical figure in collegiate wrestling, both at UMD and in the ACC and NCAA. As discussed in the article, the ACC has named Hudson Wrestler of the Week a record twelve times. This is a remarkable figure. Hudson’s notworthiness is also apparent, as several articles on Wikipedia reference him, including the University of Maryland's page as well as their head coach's page, Kerry McCoy. Please understand that Hudson is a distinctively significant figure in the collegiate wrestling community. His accomplishments will have a long lasting role in NCAA history. Also, Hudson will likely go on to coach in Division I collegiate athletics. Furthermore, in the past two years, he has won more community service, athletic and leadership awards from the University of Maryland than any other athlete at the school (this includes the University's tremendous basketball and football athletes). UMD produces some of the finest and most famous athletes in the world. Additionally, if you "google" Hudson Taylor Maryland wrestling almost 20,000 pages show up. Though, some likely include commentary on his great-great grandfather; who was a tremendously influential Christian missionary in China. Please also consider that Hudson has very famous ancestors, whose legacy bring significant public attention to Hudson's accomplishments. — Liawilde415 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 02:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC) (UTC).[reply]

— Note to closing admin: Liawilde415 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - I suggest that you read WP:BIO and WP:ATHLETE. Does he meet those criteria? If so, how? What independent third-party verifiable reliable sources have written about him? That's what's needed here, not what nice guys he and his nth-great grandfathers were. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Thank you very much for the suggestions. I appreciate your help. There are thousands of third sources that mention him. Here are some specific ones that focus on his unique achievements in collegiate wrestling

Liawilde415 (talk) 04:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC) — Liawilde415 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Reply - The above sources are important; however the article itself provides excellent sources and documents nearly all stated assertions. Also, it ought to be noted that the University of Maryland page itself mentions Taylor as a notable athlete in the school's athletic history. UMD is one of the best athletic schools in the country. And Taylor is their all-time best. I'd like to highlight that the collegiate wrestling world is the highest level for American style wrestling. If we don't allow collegiate hall-of-famers at major Division I institutions to be considered "notable", particularly when they are NCAA and conference hall-of-famers, we risk ignoring a whole group of very notable athletes. These people have reached the highest level of achievement in their respective sport and they are famous in the American style wrestling world. Time2evolve (talk) 08:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC) — Time2evolve (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Wikipedia is not a source, and the other five sources prove one thing; he was an amateur wrestler who did not compete at a high enough level to meet inclusion. Darrenhusted (talk) 01:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~: I was very happy to see this new article. Herbert Hudson Taylor IV (known as Hudson Taylor in the wrestling community) is not just a "big name" of the moment. He is a significant figure in the Maryland athletic community and will have a longstanding place in its history books. The article does not currently address this point, but he has had a major role in reviving UMD wrestling. This is particularly important, because UMD is a major athletic institution where several programs have fallen due to Title 9 and budgetary concerns. Wrestling has survived and largely because of the success Hudson Taylor has brought. He is very important to the University of Maryland's athletic narrative; and as an NCAA hall-of-famer, I can't imagine why he would not be included on Wikipedia. As someone not familiar with his significance, I can understand the concern. But, I strongly believe that this article should remain on the website. Time2evolve (talk) 03:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)— Time2evolve (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. — Duplicate !vote: Time2evolve (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above.[reply]

Delete Does not appear to satisfy WP:ATHLETE although he had a good career as a college athlete. Did not compete as a professional, nor in the Olympics or a world championship. Edison (talk) 03:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~: Hudson's notability is not solely because of his success, in and of itself. Hudson is notable because of the impact of his achievements in their larger contexts (namely, the University of Maryland, the ACC and the NCAA). He is a hall-of-famer in all three venues. Further, there are several athletes on Wikipedia who do not have that hall-of-fame status (including: Joe Dubuque, Cole Konrad, and Dustin Schlatter). I am not advocating that their pages be deleted. Accessing information about these athletes is imperative to college recruitment and all-around wrestling knowledge. But, Hudson is more than deserving given his role in the NCAA. Liawilde415 (talk) 03:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC) — Duplicate !vote: Liawilde415 (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above. — Liawilde415 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Reply - In addition to the links I gave above, I also recommend that you read WP:INHERIT (regarding his "very famous ancestors") and WP:Other stuff exists (regarding those other athletes). Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~: I understand the concern about trying to limit Wikipedia articles to

people who have competed in the Olympic games; however this is a very burdening policy for famous amatuer wrestlers. The Olympic and international levels include form of wrestling that is NOT used in schools (from elementary to college). Accordingly, some of the best and most famous amatuer wrestlers do not go on to the international level, because it is a different type of wrestling. Similarly, professional wrestling (like the WWE) is very different from international wrestling and from scholastic wrestling in the United States. Accordingly, some of the country's most successful and famous wrestlers are collegiate wrestlers. This is why it makes perfect sense for people like Hudson Taylor and Joe Dubuque to have Wikipedia pages. They are not professionals or international wrestlers, but they are beyond elite and notable on the national level. Not to mention, Hudson Taylor is an NCAA hall-of-famer. This is about as notable as you can be as an American style wrestler. Time2evolve (talk) 04:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC) — Duplicate !vote: Time2evolve (talk • contribs) has already cast a !vote above. — Time2evolve (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. —Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 08:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Not sure there is justification for declining this article on the basis of the notability of the subject. According to the guidelines, "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below." College wrestler Hudson Taylor is particularly notable for helping to raise the profile of wrestling in the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC). Coming out of high school Hudson was one of the top recruits in the country - specifically recruited by Big Ten schools Wisconsin, Michigan and Penn State as well as by traditional wrestling power, Lehigh. His decision to attend the University of Maryland a school without a recent history of success in Division I wrestling was significant and was soon followed by other top recruits selecting Maryland. The other ACC programs also benefited from renewed interest in wrestling. In just a few short years, the ACC went from having no All Americans in 2007 to having two in 2008 and 8 in 2009. Hudson was Marylands first All American since 1997 and first 2x AA since 1993. In 2009 the University of Maryland had 3 wrestlers earn All American honors - the first time since 1987. The article identifies Hudson Taylor's notable style of wrestling - which has produced a record number of wins by fall. Winning by fall is the ultimate goal of american style scholastic wrestling and Hudson has long had a reputation as a pinner. It is noteworthy that Hudson already has more career pins then all but a few of the wrestlers in the 100+ year history of Division I competition.--Nigelfothergill (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC) — Nigelfothergill (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep: I’m new to Wikipedia and came across Hudson Taylor’s page while looking under the wrestlers. I decided to post here because, as someone familiar with American wrestling, I can attest to the fact that you can’t be much more notable than Hudson Taylor in folkstyle. It seems inappropriate, based on the nature of amateur wrestling to require that an amateur folkstyle wrestler be a “professional” WWE wrestler or an international wrestler, because the formal styles are totally different. Of course, the wrestler must be important and significant within the folkstyle world to garner a Wikipedia page. This is why Hudson’s record-breaking career is so relevant to his notability. Please keep in mind that all wrestlers who compete in affiliation with an academic institution wrestle folkstyle. Folkstyle is the national American style of wrestling. Thus, in that realm, a hall-of-fame athlete like Hudson Taylor (whose become notable in UMD, ACC and, most importantly NCAA history) is at the upper-echelon of notoriety. Rachelb2 (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC) — Rachelb2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete, not notable, despite all the noise in here. Hairhorn (talk) 05:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep : Came across Taylor's article while googling his name to

find out current wrestling info (search terms were “Hudson Taylor maryland”). Definitely keep this page. He’s a major figure in national wrestling and has a permanent place in the Maryland and NCAA books. I looked up the Wikirules on this and it seems to fit. It was also interesting to learn that he’s gotten 12 Athlete of the Week honors from the ACC. That’s got to be an ACC record for wrestling as well. He’s not just some good college athlete—he’s a prominent figure who has changed the face of the sport for Maryland and the ACC. The article provides legit sources too—it’s very informative. Chasec87 (talk) 05:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC) — Chasec87 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete. Fails WP:ATHLETE. Try again if/when he becomes a pro. Favonian (talk) 10:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and strikethrough all the SPA sockpuppets. Darrenhusted (talk) 12:54, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It does not failWP:ATHLETE--to require an American wrestler to become a "pro" would ignore that the style of sport are completely different. All of the above arguments to keep this article make perfect sense; and the votes to delete it are cursory. Also, the rules specifically say that new users are welcome to comment on these discussion boards. Further, admins normally don't delete pages unless there is a consensus. Gtobias57 (talk) 16:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC) — Gtobias57 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Actually "Gtobias57", it is easily possible for an AfD to one single delete vote against one hundred keep votes and still delete an article, as this is about discussion and not voting, something that you and the rest of the SPA "Save Herbert Taylor Army" do not seem to understand. The discussion is to try and figure out if the article meets the bar for notability, a hundred keep votes will not save a page that fails to meet the bar for notability. This article fails to meet the bar, and registering twenty accounts to all vote keep does not change that. Darrenhusted (talk) 19:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Hi Darrenhusted; I appreciate your help clarifying Wikipolicy. All I was trying to say was that this article on Herbert Hudson Taylor IV is important; and that the merits of the arguments above (which suggest that Wikipedia keep the article) make a lot of sense. And, I saw from the guidelines that it's the merits of the arguments that matter. I'm new to Wikipedia and I didn't join an army. I decided to post when I saw that Taylor's page was tag. If you google his name and team the page comes up right away. Thanks again though--this system seems really organized and clear. I'm glad to learn more about it.Gtobias57 (talk) 21:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply New users are welcome to comment. And I can understand User:Liawilde415 wanting to keep, they created the article, but User:Time2evolve, User:Nigelfothergill, User:Rachelb2, User:Chasec87 and you have all registered solely to comment here. In addition Time2evolve and Chasec87 both add comments by returning before the end of a line, not to mention the syntax of the first five keepers is very similar. There are guidelines for inclusion, reached with much discussion by Wikipedia editors who have contributed more than the same keep !vote three times to one AfD. He fails WP:ATHLETE, no amount of bluster will change that, he never competed in the Olympics or any other international competition, so he will never meet the bar (unless he does something else like run for congress in 7 years time), until then registering five other accounts (could be one individual, could be five friends) and votestacking won't change that. Darrenhusted (talk) 01:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG. Nikki♥311 01:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but allow recreation if the kid gains true prominence. Until then, this article (and the kid) fail WP:ATHLETE. For those not looking at Wikipedia's Athlete link, I have two questions: Has this athlete competed professionally? Has this athlete competed in the Olympics or some World Championship? No? Then the kid doesn't meet WP:Athlete. Nikki is right as well...the article fails to meet WP:GNG. Finally, "Professional Wrestling" (i.e. WWE) and competing in Greco-Roman wrestling at a Professional level are two different things. I am surprised someone at the college level would miss that distinction. --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 04:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply If I understand the WP:ATHLETE argument put forward by Brian NO college athlete in any sport with a professional league is notable - because they have not reach the higher platitude. I found a number of current college football and basketball players with articles. It needs to be clearly understood that there is currently no professional version of American college wrestling. The WWxx is considered an athletic farce by serious wrestler/athletes. Some college wrestlers chose to enter the professional ranks of ultimate fighting (UFC) or MMA, however, this is not an extension of college wrestling but leverages the same skill set. Many American college wrestlers do chose to pursue an Olympic opportunity in either Grecco Roman or the more popular Freestyle version. If true athletic notability in wrestling is to be considered then only scholastic (also known as "Folkstyle" - including American collegiate) and Olympic styles are relevant to notability WP:ATHLETE. Obviously WWxx or other "professional" "wrestlers" can be notable for many reasons - however - not first and foremost for being "athletes" (as per WP:ATHLETE). --Nigelfothergill (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The guidelines for ATHLETE are simple, compete at the Olympics (or other international competition as an amateur) or as a professional. Or do something else, like publish some books or star in a film or release an album. UFC, MMA, WWE or TNA would be options for amateurs, but if the sum total of the person's achievement is wrestling at the collegiate level then they have not done enough to have an article. ATHLETE is a bright line standard, you either pass of fail, Taylor fails. You are right "NO college athlete in any sport... is notable", unless they compete at the highest level. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or if they pass WP:GNG...if there are enough notable news sources about them other than just trivial mentions. Nikki♥311 20:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Whilst there may be issues with WP:ATHLETE, I don't see an issue with WP:BIO and there is definitely a case for a pass in both WP:N and WP:GNG. I think this would be a case of believing that a likely pass for WP:ATHLETE is coming - probably in London in 2012. I know that's crystal balling but as long as the other passes are there I think we could apply WP:IAR here in order to overcome WP:ATHLETE requirements. RICK ME DOODLE YOU DOODLE 10:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then delete for now and recreate once he competes in the Olympics. We don't judge bios on future performance, that opens a can of worms for all BLPs. Should we then start allowing band bios because they will have an album out in two years time? Put bios for 12 year olds acting in nativity plays because in two years they will be in films? He's an amateur wrestler know for being an amateur wrestler and nothing else, there are hundreds of wrestler all of whom may compete in the Olympics, but at the same time he could tear a muscle next week and his career could be over, there's no reason to IAR on a BLP, without the wrestling he doesn't pass the GNG, with it he doesn't pass ATHLETE. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I am of the opinion that sometimes exceptions should be made to the general rule about athletes, especially when an amateur is, if true, one of the "top-ten pinners in all-time NCAA history." The sourcing must be appropriate as well, but the NCAA website is fine for me. Bearian (talk) 22:07, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 22:07, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - In collegiate or freestyle wrestling, the NCAA is the highest level. WP:ATHLETE states that the highest level is usually considered to be the Olympics, not that it is required to be the Olympics. Both Sam Bradford and Colt McCoy have articles even though they have not competed at the professional level and there is no international competition for American football. Taylor should be evaluated on that standard, not that he is not a professional or an Olympian. (GregJackP (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Sam Bradford and Tebow (to address below) won the Heisman and Colt McCoy was runner-up, That's an achievement. But mostly it has little to do with Taylor. His career so far does not justify a bio, and without it he doesn't pass GNG. Darrenhusted (talk) 18:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete – First off, there are many situations where a college athlete is notable enough for an article, so I don't buy that line of reasoning (are we going to delete Tim Tebow now?) In cases like this, the GNG carries great weight for me, since we don't want pages on every college athlete ever. Unfortunately, I don't think any of the references provided can be considered substantial third-party coverage, which is needed for general notability. Most of the pages are either from his school or the team's conference, and none of the rest appear substantial. I looked on Google News for him and didn't find anything establishing notability in my mind, though I am open to see what others can find. Also, if this gets kept, I would recommend renaming to Hudson Taylor, which seems to be what he is commonly named. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 02:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He placed third in a national championship. If he had placed first, i would have said keep. I'm perfectly willing to have college athletes; if we want to extend the criteria for notability somewhat, I wouldn't oppose it, but we would need a general discussion, not one driven by a group of fans of a particular athlete. DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, DGG's right. Abductive (reasoning) 03:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply There are 10 folkstyle wrestlers who place first every year in the NCAA national tournament--that is a huge pool of people. Hudson is top-ten, approaching on top-four, all-time for falls in NCAA history. That's a very limited, elite class of wrestlers. Liawilde415 (talk) 05:43, 11 February 2010 (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.