Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Edwin Cooke

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, borderline WP:SNOW, as there is no reasonable possibility that this discussion will yield any other outcome. Subject is demonstrably an Olympic medalist, with sources existing sufficient to support that contention. BD2412 T 22:01, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

George Edwin Cooke

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Possibly fails WP:GNG. Lack of third-party source. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I wish I knew where some of the information in the article was sourced from. I just searched on Newspapers.com for a good 20 minutes or so and only found a couple mentions of him playing in suburban St. Louis leagues, and then nothing more than lineup listings. As of now, fails WP:GNG, would support deleting if nothing else can be found. SportingFlyer T·C 23:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Going to officially ask that this be merged back into Football at the 1904 Olympics (or whatever the proper title of the article is.) This fails WP:GNG, as do all of the other participants in this tournament, but there's just enough out there to include their participation in the tournament. Coverage of the tournament only showed up in St Louis and a brief mention in a Chicago newspaper. SportingFlyer T·C 14:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Sports Reference [1] suggests he played in the 1904 Olympics, which would have him pass WP:NOLYMPICS. Can any other sources be found to verify that claim? Hog Farm (talk) 02:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The coverage of the 1904 Olympic association football tournament was, as far as I can tell, on the local side, and didn't discuss any of the players in any sort of significant fashion. Perhaps that was the style at the time, but I'm not sure there's notability for any players. [2] [3] [4] This supports his brother's broken leg, though: [5] Honestly, if I had my unilateral pick of what to do here, I'd redirect ALL of the players notable only for appearing in the 1904 football tournament to the 1904 football tournament page and update that page with player birthdates and birth/death locations. The coverage of this just doesn't support individual articles. SportingFlyer T·C 06:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As an Olympic medalist, he is, of course, listed in the IOC's Olympic medalist database. Mallon's book on the 1904 Games also lists him. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 09:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are these just directory listings? The database certainly is. That's not enough to support a standalone article. Third place received a "trophy." [6] SportingFlyer T·C 15:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was responding to a comment asking for further sources verifying the claim that Cooke played in the 1904 Olympics. Those sources confirm that. There should be no serious doubt that Cooke played all three games for the third-place association football team at the 1904 Olympics. (That puts him in WP:NOLYMPICS.) The IOC by fiat has declared that that means he is a bronze medalist, regardless of what physical object was presented at the time; we recognize IOC fiat in this area all the time for assigning/stripping/reassigning medals. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 10:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - notable as an Olympic Games medal winner. Giant Snowman 10:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
GiantSnowman, even with the lack of sources? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 11:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This person was active 120 years ago, of course we are going too struggle to find online sources! Giant Snowman 12:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GiantSnowman, surely offline sources can be found. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 13:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, and I'm sure someone with the relevant knowledge of early 1900s newspapers etc (and resources to be able to access them) will be able to find some out. That person is not me. Giant Snowman 15:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GiantSnowman, so this "keep" hinges on there's sources, somewhere. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 17:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it hinges on the fact he won a medal at the Olympics. Please do not ping me here again. You are badgering. Giant Snowman 18:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - common sense here, folks, we're not deleting Olympic medalists. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 13:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jonel, well we could merge them together! --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually some question as to whether he was a medalist at all - in my research of St Louis newspapers, there was an article that mentioned only gold and silver medals would be awarded for this competition as initially only four teams played. None of the players in the competition were ever covered significantly. If we can't write an article that passes WP:GNG, we shouldn't have an article at all. SportingFlyer T·C 14:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The IOC recognizes him as a bronze medalist. For early Games, awards were inconsistent (e.g., 1896 winners received silver, not gold). Nevertheless, we credit first through third as gold, silver, bronze. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 14:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there are other sources out there, though, we're going to have a permastub to a directory source. I've looked through all of the 1904 St Louis newspapers which covered the 1904 Olympic "Socker" (their spelling) and there's barely anything in there regarding who scored. Only three teams took part in the competition since one dropped out the week before, so everyone who took part in this competition medaled. And while several papers picked up Galt winning the gold medal, I've only found one contemporaneous source so far on the silver medal replay game. We'd be a lot better off compiling all of this data in one location instead of having non-WP:GNG qualifying stubs for all of the players. SportingFlyer T·C 06:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Snowman Idan (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We need to stop slavishly following rules that were developed for modern systems in their application to past ones. The 1904 St. Louis olympics were not really like modern olympics, and being a participant there was not in any way a real sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That would be an argument for deleting a participant, User:Johnpacklambert. You ignore that he won a bronze medal. I'm not aware of any precedent for removing a medallist who meets WP:NOLYMPICS. Nfitz (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have to second the idea we should reject the plan to create a bunch of permanent, non-GNG meeting stubs. Wikipedia is not meant to be a directory.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable per above. --Seacactus 13 (talk) 14:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seacactus 13, even with the lack of sources? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 19:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, there are several, and as stated above, as I said, it was a long time ago, so obviously will be more difficult to obtain more. Easily passes WP:NOLYMPICS.--Seacactus 13 (talk) 15:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NOLYMPICS. Hard to find sources from over a century ago on anyone, but they likely exist in this case. Also, I'll note that JPL appears to have seconded his own !vote in a comment. While he is certainly entitled to post followup comments, I am saying this to ensure the closer does not give duplicate weight to it without checking the names. Smartyllama (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, which sources do you think are out there which haven't been analysed yet? St Louis papers from 1904 are on Newspapers.com and are easily reviewable by anyone with a subscription (which you can apply for with your Wikimedia library card). The Bill Mallon book, as far as I can tell, only lists his name in the lineup, though there may be a page that I didn't see in the book preview due to access reasons. We have two sports directories, one of which knows he worked for Liggett & Myers. Where's the significant coverage, and where else could we find significant coverage? This isn't an instance of "we don't know where to look, and he passes a SNG:" the football tournament featured only three teams, two of which were amateur teams local to St Louis, and though the gold medal match was covered in Chicago the tournament doesn't appear well covered outside St Louis as far as I can tell. None of these sources are significant on a personal level to any of the players. SportingFlyer T·C 19:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - not only easily meets NOLYMPICS, he even won a medal. More sources would be great, but there are some. The nominator should withdraw the nomination as it's clear that it's a keep, rather than wasting everyone's time arguing unnecessarily. Nfitz (talk) 23:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nfitz, so you saying that the article can be kept with just 1 source? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 01:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tyw7 I'm not sure how you get that out of my comment - or the relevance. What I'm saying is that WP:N is very easily met, and you need to stop wasting our time with irrelevant arguments. Why start a hypothetical discussion about if there was only one source? Nfitz (talk) 03:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, there's only one inline source presented, which can be a bit confusing - I've seen some people tag articles as unsourced even when there are sources presented in a format different than a ref-list template. Could also be referencing the fact there's only one source in the article that's not a directory reference listing. SportingFlyer T·C 04:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SportingFlyer, exactly that. I've included more tags if Nfitz wanna nit pick the fact there's only 1 reference listed. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 10:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per arguments above. Pretty notable as a recognized medalist.--Ortizesp (talk) 23:14, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to note again that no one here has yet demonstrated WP:GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 00:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:N (emphasis mine):
A topic is presumed to merit an article if:

1. It meets either the general notability guideline below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline listed in the box on the right; and

2. It is not excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy.

-- Jonel (Speak to me) 01:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We have a long-standing policy of deleting articles which pass a SNG which fail WP:GNG. A SNG is merely a presumption an article will meet WP:GNG. None of the sources in the article count towards WP:GNG unless the page in the Mallon book I can't access goes into more detail about him than just listing him in a lineup, and a thorough source of period records show papers don't really cover the participating players apart from lineups - most don't even have first names. SportingFlyer T·C 04:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you have a "policy" that contradicts the guideline as written? -- Jonel (Speak to me) 09:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is no such policy User:SportingFlyer - the policy is clearly defined as meeting either N or GNG. There's some precedent for removing some particularly borderline examples of NFOOTBALL who have only played a handful of professional football minutes and have since retired. But I'm aware of no precedent, let alone policy, of removing any medallists who meet NOLYMPICS. Please point to such a policy, or precedent, if I am wrong. Nfitz (talk) 18:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While my proposal here was opposed (and wasn't specific to a situation related to this article, as we have had several Olympian stubs kept recently that failed WP:GNG but nobody could even search for sources.) I think it clearly shows the general consensus that meeting a sports SNG does not mean GNG does not have to be met. Also note I'm not really advocating for this to be deleted, just merged upstream - according to sources at the time, he only won a bronze participation trophy in a three-team tournament featuring two local amateur St. Louis clubs, and we can only source him to directories. He's just not notable enough for a standalone article. SportingFlyer T·C 18:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Competed at the Olympics. I've sourced that with the new Olympics source site (Olympedia) and created an archive link to Sports Ref. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:47, 17 May 2020 (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.