Deletion of John Holmes (football player)

Comment: I wasn't saying that college football was not an amateur sport at ''all'', but for  purposes, because there is a professional level beyond college, it is not in the same category as the other "ameteur" sports. That's for Wikipedia article purposes, not the world as a whole. I cited  because most of the references for the player and not the team were for the bust and subsequent dismissal from the team. The "not notable even on the team" was not that he wasn't known amongst his teammates, but that he is not that well known amongst the less-than-rabid WVU fans (I'm certainly a fan... I've got a WV shirt on and I can see the WVU Coliseum from where I'm sitting right now). The rabid ones would know him certainly, but the rest of us wouldn't if not for the bust, not like Boo McLee, Johnny Dingle, or Scooter Berry. (Schmitt, Slaton, and White are on a whole other level... practically cult figures, especially Owen Schmitt \o/ _o_ \o/ _o_
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: DarkAudit's claim that college football players cannot be notable under  because the NFL is the "highest level of competition" or because "amateur sports" are those which have no professional league is wrong.  links to Amateur sports which has a section Amateur sports#North American collegiate athletics which discusses American college football as an "amateur sport." A college football player, particular one on a top national team, or one who wins national awards, can certainly be considered notable, since there are multiple independent and reliable sources with substantial coverage, satisfying  as well
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE||WP:ATHLETE||WP:N)

Comment: Can't speak for the NFL, but the CFL is fully professional, so isn't the highest level of amateur sport. If college football is indeed the highest level of amateur sport, then surely he meets . Are there no national-level amateur teams
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: Seriously, you're going to have to really explain how I am "lawyering" by stating that college football is not considered an amateur sport for the purposes of 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: after reading through all this debate and looking at the article and linked stories, I don't think there's enough to sustain an article under either thlete or io.  The ESPN article is really the only thing that could count as significant coverage.  If it had been picked up by nationwide papers, I'd be swayed, but the evidence presented doesn't seem to say it was.  The USA Today short mention of "losing . . . John Holmes to legal problems" http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/bigeast/wvu.htm doesn't count as enough for me
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A||WP:B)

Comment: Not at all. I called them to confirm if he had been named to any of those accolades because if he had, it would have shown notability that without it just isn't there. I just was following up on your "news coverage like that" statement. The bust and hoped-for return is still the same case. Take away the stories about the bust, and there are ''no'' stories where he is the feature. You'll note that I also argued in favor of deleting the Willie Edwards (a member of the 1988 Fiesta Bowl team) article a few months back, and his record is impeccable. Just being a member of a top-25 football team, even a starter, does not make one inherently notable. Solid play does not make one notable, one must '''stand out'''. He does not. My support for WVU does not change the fact that the guidelines in  and the College Football Project as they currently stand are not met, and no amount of claiming "yes he is" over and over again in spite of that will change it. Slaton's in the NFL. White's a Heisman candidate. Devine has ESPN drooling. Schmitt's on the cover of NCAA '09. Those are the type of player the project deems article-worthy. Not everyone who takes the field, starter or scrub
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: There's nothing in  that says that the second clause about amateur sports is an OR statement. And reading the rest of Wikipedia:Notability (people) that would not be the case
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: College football is ''not'' the highest level of the sport. The NFL, CFL, etc is. He has not won any pre or postseason awards. If not for the drug charges, he would have received little of the press he is currently receiving, which is basically . And in the interest of full disclosure, I'm local to WVU (I can see the Coliseum out my front window). Don't let your fannhood trump guidelines here. Not every Mountaineer deserves a page
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: concerns relating to  per DarkAudit
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: yes it is, and I'm one of those wary people of granting a notability "blank check" to "all-Americans" because there really isn't any clear-cut definition of exactly what is an "all-American"--which brings us right back to this athlete.  If the athlete qualifies for notability under  and  (and I believe this one does), then the college football notability guidelines certainly wouldn't "take away" the notability that has already been established.  This is one of the reasons that specific guidelines have yet to be developed in that essay.  It's more than just solid performance, it's the coverage of two seasons worth of solid performance coupled with the legal issues.  Heck, the player could have had lousy performance, but with news coverage like that over time he'd still be notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: The drug bust is a local story. ESPN picked it up because of the notability of the ''program'', not the player. Notability is not inherited or conferred by association. Just starting for a top 25 team does not meet the established guidelines. The bust and it's aftermath is . The CU rape controversy made ''national'' headlines for weeks, and destroyed the credibility of the coach. They made a movie about Rudy. Again, no comparison
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: With "news coverage like that" over time he'll be doing ''hard time''. The coverage where ''he'' is the subject, and not the team as a whole, is solely about the drug case. In other words, except for the drug bust, he's mentioned only in passing as part of a wider article. That does not meet the guidelines of , let alone the athlete subsection. Notability has not been established for his performance on the field. When the WVU Sports Information office doesn't have any record of him being named all-anything or even getting a player of the week or month (yes, I called them) notability isn't there
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: The Times West Virginian is the daily paper of Fairmont, WV, and Bob Hertzel is the former Sports Editor of the Dominion-Post. WDTV is the CBS affiliate in the Clarksburg-Weston market, so reliability is a non-issue. The issue I have with those two sources is location, location, location. For all intents and purposes they are covering a local story. WVU is a mere 40 miles from Clarksburg, and is the 800-pound gorilla in the area. You can't throw a rock without hitting something or someone associated with the university in a three-county area. WVU is part of their beat. There is or will be a feature story done on nearly every player who starts for the Mountaineers between now and the end of the bowl season (then we switch to basketball players). Such has been the case for decades. They're the only game in town. Even so, the articles are not about his play or projected play. They're about one incident, the bust, with a couple of followups regarding his dismissal from and hoped-for return to the team. *All* the articles that ''feature'' him, instead of mentioning him in passing, are about the bust. That is a clear-cut case of 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Clearly notable using the same arguments referenced above, except they have been mis-applied and called "clearly NN" (non-notable).  Please read  a little more carefully. Also, if you're going to quote  please remember to quote all of it, including the part that states "Competitors who have competed at the highest level in amateur sports" ... college football is the highest level of amatuer football
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:ATHLETE)