Deletion of Micah Johnson

Comment: WP:ATHLETE is considered to be an additional criterion to notability, as indicated Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria|'''here''': (''Should a person fail to meet these additional criteria, they may still be notable under Wikipedia:Notability.'') Whether this player may or may not meet WP:ATHLETE should not be the question. The basic criteria, as outlined by , is that these players must be the ''subject of published3 secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent,4 and independent of the subject.5''. It also says that ''if the depth of the coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability''. Take a look at the sources referenced by the article - do they not meet these requirements? I think they do. http://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tab=wn&q=%22micah+johnson%22+kentucky More can definitely be added if needed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: If one of the article writers could provide a |source for ''Rated the nation’s top inside linebacker'', that context would sway my vote either way.  Until then I'll be neutral
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Meets the GNG. Until I've seen a lot more, I disagree that there is consensus for the  to trump the |GNG. DGG's point about substituting our judgment for the professionals on whose fact checking and editorial discretion we rely in obtaining reliable sources in the first place is apt as well
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE||WP:N)

Comment: Meets general |notability guidelines, which generally take precedence over specific conditions listed under  (which are meant to help establish notability if the general conditions aren't met
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:ATHLETE)