Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tammy Hostetler
- 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 keep. Modussiccandi (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Tammy Hostetler (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
All awards mentioned in sources were awarded at junior level, sourcing is scanty at best, no mainstream media coverage. Fails WP:GNG; WP:BASIC. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Martial arts. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Passes GNG, If the basis is that she won in junior tournaments, this is false. The sources clearly show that she medaled in a national tournament and two international tournaments. [1] BlackAmerican (talk)
- Keep. The Herald & Review mention is confusingly stated, but the British Open and U.S. National medals don't appear to be at the junior level and would meet WP:MANOTE notability requirements. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 13:42, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:30, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Delete. Comment: WP:MANOTE is an essay and so carries zero weight at AfD; the appropriate guideline is NSPORT, which requires GNG be met. BlackAmerican what multiple independent, secondary, and reliable sources have you found that give her SIGCOV? EDIT: The coverage in Black Belt magazine seems substantial, but we'd need more than one source. American Judo newspaper is published by the org she belongs to and so is not independent, and none of the other sources appear to contribute to GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 22:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- MANOTE is relevant in that NSPORT has no additional guidance for judoka. She has several mentions in Black Belt articles during her active career, are you asking for additional publications covering her? There is repeated coverage of her in the Decatur Herald and Review, including her national and international competitions. I'd also question the idea that a national association's newspaper wouldn't be considered independent of a member of the association; it could be different for coverage of an association's leader or association activities, but reporting on competitions and any given competitors would seem to be outside of the individual's ability to influence the coverage. Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, MANOTE is not an SNG so it does not have anything beyond essay status. Athletes that aren't covered by an NSPORT sub-SNG default to SPORTCRIT, which is essentially GNG.
- I can't access the first Herald & Review article, but the second wouldn't be considered SIGCOV as it has just a few sentences on her reporting event results. But I can believe she has more coverage based on the magazine profile so if there's a lot more content directly on her in the other H&R piece then that's probably sufficient for GNG.
- National organizations are never considered independent of their members -- they (orgs) are financially obliged to promote positive material related to the org and therefore are not neutral or reflective of actual wider interest. Hope that helps. JoelleJay (talk) 17:05, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- MANOTE is relevant in that NSPORT has no additional guidance for judoka. She has several mentions in Black Belt articles during her active career, are you asking for additional publications covering her? There is repeated coverage of her in the Decatur Herald and Review, including her national and international competitions. I'd also question the idea that a national association's newspaper wouldn't be considered independent of a member of the association; it could be different for coverage of an association's leader or association activities, but reporting on competitions and any given competitors would seem to be outside of the individual's ability to influence the coverage. Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 13:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Passes criteria 1 of WP:ANYBIO as a medalist in both national and international events at the top tier (not the junior level as inaccurately stated by the nominator) of her sport.4meter4 (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, that's not correct. Per longstanding consensus, upheld by the recent massive RfC, we still require athletes with such achievements to meet GNG (hence the wording in NSPORT that "SIGCOV is likely to exist", rather than "is presumed notable"). JoelleJay (talk) 20:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- @JoelleJay, I think you are mischaracterizing the consensus from that RFC which specifically targeted "participation based criteria" (see summation of that RFC at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability) not medalists/ winners of a major sporting event. That RFC was addressing many of the prior lax issues at NSPORT such as everyone who has participated at the Olympics or in a national sports team as notable. Clearly they aren't, and SIGCOV needs to be demonstrated. The consensus was that many of the participation based SNGs at NSPORT were poor predictors of notability (ie subjects may or may not have significant coverage for merely competing at the top tier of a given sport). However, that RFC consensus does not extend to people who have won a major competition (a medalist); which still meets criteria 1 at ANYBIO.4meter4 (talk) 03:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- @4meter4, No, it absolutely does cover medalists. One of the major consensuses was to change "presumed notable" to "SIGCOV is likely to exist" for all criteria, including for medalists. NSPORT also still requires GNG to be met for all subjects. JoelleJay (talk) 17:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- If honors like being in the Baseball Hall of Fame were considered automatic ANYBIO passes, this would be reflected in the NBASEBALL guidance, which was revamped following the RfC and would have addressed this point then if it was valid. But as it stands there is no achievement in sports that has received consensus support for automatic ANYBIO notability. JoelleJay (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- I still maintain that the higher policy of ANYBIO applies here. Changes to one area of policy language doesn't necessarily impact the application of other relevant policies. It seems odd to me that NSPORT wouldn't have some threshold for notability based on achievement. That doesn't seem congruent with our wider policies on biographical notability. On a side note, I wouldn't equate winning an international competition at the highest competitive level of a sport the same as being inducted into a Hall of Fame. One is an achievement, the other is an award. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
One is an achievement, the other is an award.
I specifically used the HoF example because achievements aren't included in ANYBIO. Awards are an indication that independent bodies have determined, through consensus, that a person merits special recognition for their accomplishments. JoelleJay (talk) 23:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- I still maintain that the higher policy of ANYBIO applies here. Changes to one area of policy language doesn't necessarily impact the application of other relevant policies. It seems odd to me that NSPORT wouldn't have some threshold for notability based on achievement. That doesn't seem congruent with our wider policies on biographical notability. On a side note, I wouldn't equate winning an international competition at the highest competitive level of a sport the same as being inducted into a Hall of Fame. One is an achievement, the other is an award. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- @JoelleJay, I think you are mischaracterizing the consensus from that RFC which specifically targeted "participation based criteria" (see summation of that RFC at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Sports notability) not medalists/ winners of a major sporting event. That RFC was addressing many of the prior lax issues at NSPORT such as everyone who has participated at the Olympics or in a national sports team as notable. Clearly they aren't, and SIGCOV needs to be demonstrated. The consensus was that many of the participation based SNGs at NSPORT were poor predictors of notability (ie subjects may or may not have significant coverage for merely competing at the top tier of a given sport). However, that RFC consensus does not extend to people who have won a major competition (a medalist); which still meets criteria 1 at ANYBIO.4meter4 (talk) 03:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per 4meter4. I think it's fair to say guidelines that apply to all biographies would trump guidelines for only sportspeople. WP:ANYBIO is clearly passed. ♡RAFAEL♡(talk) 05:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep in light of historical significance of her achievements. Women in judo were unable to compete in the Olympics until 1992. When Hostetler was competing in the 1970s, there weren't many other international competitions either, so the fact that she did earn medals at the British Open as an American judoka was significant (not to mention the gold medal at the National Judo Association championship, and all the other medals in other US competitions). In terms of sources establishing notability, it's important not to miss the forest for the trees, and look at the aggregate. The Black Belt magazine profile is solid as independent, reliable, in-depth coverage. In addition to that, there is enough non-trivial coverage in multiple sources such as Judo magazine (British) and American Judo (where she is on the cover). Both pieces go beyond "routine game coverage" in that they are covering national or international championships. Even if coverage from publications affiliated with sports associations alone is insufficient, she has coverage that goes beyond that in Black Belt, and one could even argue that the British Judo magazine is "independent" in the sense that Hostetler was not part of that association. Also, in highly specialized fields such as judo, mainstream media understanding of the sports is poor to non-existent; in this particular instance, I would weight the association articles more heavily, because they specifically are not puff pieces. Cielquiparle (talk) 08:20, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- 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.