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.
This person is not notable for anything tennis related and seems non-notable to me. Perhaps all athletic directors and philosophy professors are notable as I have no idea the qualifications from other wiki projects. There is an LA Times article link listed but it was because he was dead.
Fyunck(click) (
talk)
07:54, 11 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep. Becker is notable for significant association with founding and developing of
California State University, Fullerton, originally Orange State. One way is that he was highly involved in the spectacularly successful 1962 intercollegiate elephant race that put the university on the map, nationwide. There are numerous
Orange County Register and/or
Los Angeles Times articles significantly about him; i have added some and there are now 3 and 1 of each type; there are more available. One unfortunate way that he was repeatedly in the news was for tragedy of his son being killed in the campus library in a
mass murder incident. Becker, as a salient university official and as personally directly affected, in numerous stories was repeatedly quoted for his views, e.g. on the convicted shooter's alleged insanity, at repeated hearings for parole. The article could use more development, but this is a solid keep situation. --
doncram17:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep -- obituaries in L.A. Times (major national newspaper) and Orange County Register (major regional paper) are sufficient for GNG, regardless of WP:PROF. Sourced w/ enough other minor references to be sufficient. --
Michael Scott Cuthbert(talk)05:26, 12 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment This person - an athletic director - should not be judged per WP:ACADEMIC, but rather per WP:GNG. And it is ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE that obits in major regional papers make you notable; I have only heard that argument advanced for the New York Times, and even for the NYT it did not achieve consensus. I'll evaluate GNG and come back with a recommendation for this subject, but both of these rationales, for delete (PROF) and keep (what are we calling it now, WP:OBITUARY?), are invalid. --
MelanieN (
talk)
23:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep He has plenty of coverage (thank you, Doncram), not just his obituaries. He was the founding dean of his university and played a major role in its founding and development, which is significantly reported in major publications. (I added another one.) --
MelanieN (
talk)
23:57, 16 May 2014 (UTC)reply
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.