Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caleb Rufer
There are three principles at work here.  First off, the GNG explicitly supercedes all subordinate notability criteria.  If a subject passes the GNG, it doesn't matter a tinker's damn that he doesn't meet NFOOTY, any more than it wouldn't matter that he likely doesn't pass , ,  or  either.Secondly, the nom makes a common mistake: that of presuming that "sports journalism" somehow by having to do with sports fails to satisfy .  This is not what the guideline actually says; ROUTINE debars casual mention of a subject in match previews, recaps, roster lists and the like as being indicative of notability.  Articles which are, however, about the subject and which discuss the subject in "significant detail" are fine.Thirdly, the subject's merit - or lack thereof - is irrelevant.  "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list" doesn't come with a "... unless he doesn't deserve it" or "... only if he makes a significant contribution to the annals of history" caveat.As such, that notability is not inherited is irrelevant here.  We're not giving the subject a pass solely because he's related to someone more famous.  We're doing so because he's received coverage in "significant detail" in multiple reliable sources.  Whether such sources chose to cover him because of his father is a philosophical question outside of our scope, and outside of Wikipedia policies and guidelines
— User:Ravenswing, 13:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NHOCKEY||WP:CREATIVE||WP:PROF||WP:PORNBIO||WP:ROUTINE (Wikipedia:Notability)