Deletion of Ernesto Alciati

Comment: OLYMPICS doesn't exist because someone decided out of nowhere that all Olympians are notable or to override general notability guidelines. With arguably the exception of the earliest editions, but certainly by 1924, people who attended the Olympics were not just picked out of a hat, they were elite athletes at the national level. In 2019 in English, yes, the only thing that is readily available is that he failed to finish the marathon at the Games, but the fact that he was there in the first place suggests that he had at least some success in his home country, which is probably difficult to find information about unless you have access to Italian publications from the 1920s. OLYMPICS exists, therefore, because consensus determined that if the individual was at the Games, there is a significant likelihood that sufficient sources for a biography exist that may just be difficult to access. My work is on pre-1952 Egyptian athletes, and information beyond their Olympic appearance is difficult to find in Arabic online, let alone in English. But I happen to have access to newspapers and sports journals from that era and there is plenty of coverage on all of them that would satisfy  with ease. For a country like Italy, which at the time had a better-developed press and sporting infrastructure, there must exist coverage of all of their Olympians that would easily satisfy , I just can't access it (or at least read it). OLYMPICS represents that consensus that these sources likely exist for all Olympians, even if we cannot find them, and so we can avoid discussions such as this and presume notability unless there is convincing evidence otherwise
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: While this ''technically'' meets , in that he took part in 1924, there is nowhere near enough for . The little narrative there is in the article has been derived from statistical records and I don't think that is sufficient for an article. My take on the argument above is that the SNG provides an indication of potential notability which must then be determined by reference to the GNG. Achieving SNG by means of a statistical mention is not a qualifier for GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLYMPICS||WP:GNG)

Comment: notable per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLYMPICS)

Comment: I don't have the time to research this individual, but it's worth noting that the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (sports), of which  is a section, specifically says {{tq|"All information included in Wikipedia, including articles about sports, must be verifiable. '''In addition, the subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline.''' The guideline on this page provides bright-line guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to meet the General Notability Guideline."}} (Emphasis mine). This SNG is ''not'' a substitute for GNG
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLYMPICS)

Comment: notable per . That's policy with backing consensus. All other opinions are  viewpoints contrary to policy. If you don't like that particular SNG too bad. We follow written policy. Contrary to the deletionists in this discussion, SNGs exist to temporarily lower the threshold of inclusion in specific content areas where proving GNG compliance is difficult. Otherwise we wouldn't need any guidelines except for GNG. SNGs are just as authoritative as GNG within their particular content area. Stating otherwise is just false
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLYMPICS||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: to Athletics at the 1908 Summer Olympics – Men's marathon at the suggestion of both Doug Mehus. While the subject meets , so do a dozen people who don't get articles because the fact that they only have a initial for a forename (e.g. W. F. Theunissen, A. B. Mole) or no forename at all (Vincent) makes it clear that there are not gonna be any biographical info other than participation anytime soon. Perhaps we should make centralized athlete lists List of English cricketers (1787–1825)|like in early modern English cricket, where the scorecards are incomplete to a point where we have people like J. Cox, S. Maynard, Venner, two people named Walker, Morgan, H. C. Howard, Ashurst - oh, I could go on forever. Heck, we even List of Major League Baseball players with unidentified given names|have a Wikipedia:Featured list on the subject. It is extremely important to note that if it's voted to redirect the article, this could have a huge effect on Wikipedia's coverage on Olympic athletes
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLY)

Comment: to applicable Olympic games article which mentions this athlete per {{u|JzG}} below, subject to further reply significant counter-arguments from {{u|Bearcat}} et al. (ping me!), was {{s|'''Keep''', possibly '''speedy'''}} per {{u|Bearcat}}'s rationale above. I don't know the rules on the Olympics, but to ''me'', one doesn't need to ''finish'' a competition. They could be signed up to participate on the Olympic team and then back out at the opening ceremonies and still be ''notable''. Also, +1 to {{u|Bearcat}} for his reply to {{u|S Marshall}} that different fields of human endeavour (i.e., writing) merit different otability|notability tests. I couldn't have said it better myself; or
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Meets . A marathon runner competed in Olympic games is unquestionable notable in Wikipedia
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLYMPICS)

Comment: Competed at the Olympics, per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLY)

Comment: per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOLYMPICS)