Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Barrett (utility player)

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. RL0919 (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Barrett (utility player)

[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)

non-notable, non-female non-minority ([1]) former baseball player who played in three games over a three-year career, with no birthday, no deathday, no batting stance and no throwing stance. The only indicator of notability I could find was an entry in The Rank and File of 19th Century Major League Baseball: Biographies of 1,084 Players, Owners, Managers and Umpires, which is not enough to establish notability on its own. Therapyisgood (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ from what I have seen it seems like he truly is just a non-notable baseball player. I found an entry for him in Paul Batesel's Players and Teams of the National Association, 1871-1875; however, this too provides little to establish notability other than saying the player just known as "Barrett" might also be him. I just don't see enough to get over WP:GNG here. TartarTorte 15:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Technically meets NBASE as NA players are included; eligible for deletion per footnote #7; dismayed by the first reason for deletion: because he is a white male. The link to such reasoning in the DRV wasn't even agreed with [2]. Makes the whole nomination suspect in my mind. YMMV. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 15:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets the notability target as above. You won't find many minority, women baseball players in the 19th Century to be honest, so that point is moot. Oaktree b (talk) 23:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Found a mention of Barrett from his July 8 debut with the Kekiongas in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Apparently he was a member of the Baltimore Pastime Club who seem to have been around since the 1860s. I found him with the Pastimes twice in June, once in July and once in October of 1871. Grated these aren't from the National Association, but its more than we had on this guy previously. Penale52 (talk) 02:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Granted those are interesting finds, they are all WP:ROUTINE coverage of games, not WP:SIGCOV of Barrett. Therapyisgood (talk) 15:07, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. LA84 Foundation has a pretty good digital library for 19th century baseball. I'll dig into a bit as time permits this week. Here is his player contract card from The Sporting News listing at least one more team he played for. Cbl62 (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I note that The Rank and File of 19th Century Major League Baseball: Biographies of 1,084 Players, Owners, Managers and Umpires (cited by nom) qualifies as one instance of WP:SIGCOV. Per BR Bullpen (here), he was also an umpire and was the subject of a two-page SABR piece titled "Bill Barrett", in Bill Carle, ed.: Biographical Research Committee Report, SABR, March/April 2012, pp. 2-3. Cbl62 (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cbl62: which is here, and isn't more than a paragraph saying he had an "interesting" career, and suggesting who he may be. I'm also not sure a self-published newsletter is WP:SIGCOV. More on a player was voted to merge at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis (baseball) (2nd nomination), I should note (two published books plus routine newspaper coverage). Therapyisgood (talk) 22:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a better link to the SABR newsletter? The link you gave doesn't let me open the Apr 2012 newsletter. As for the given-name-unknown players with one-game careers, those are really special cases. In the history of Wikipedia, we have never deleted an MLB player whose complete name was known or one who appeared in multiples games and seasons. This would be a first. For this reason, we should review all available sources before making a decision. Cbl62 (talk) 23:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep appears to pass NBASE per above comment. NemesisAT (talk) 00:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:NBASEBALL having played Major League Baseball with four different teams over three seasons. Indeed, he played in MLB's inaugural season (1871) and per Baseball-Reference.com was the 102nd major-league player. He also appears to pass WP:GNG with the following WP:SIGCOV:

(1) A 19-line biographical entry in noted baseball historian David Nemec's book on 19th century players, The Rank and File of 19th Century Major League Baseball: Biographies of 1,084 Players, Owners, Managers and Umpires. See here.

(2) a ~~2-page~~ biographical entry on Barrett in the Society of American Baseball Research's Biographical Research Committee Report in March/April 2012. The piece was written by Bill Carle who has served as chairman of SABR’s Biographical Research Committee since 1988. See here. ~~I have written to SABR asking for a pdf of Carle's piece on Barrett. When I receive it, I will add pertinent details to the article.~~ Cbl62 (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per NBASE and Cbl62. Also a very poor deletion rationale. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Also per NBASE and CBL62. Under the rationale by the nominator, a great many 19th century baseball players would be deleted (white, male, unknown batting and throwing information, lack of contemporary coverage unearthed from 130+ years ago).Neonblak ^talk - 15:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep The nominator's rationale notwithstanding, generally for a keep under WP:NBASE there needs to be something that trends towards I think that the biography in Nemec's book is a strong start. Similar to Carle's piece that was found by Cbl62, Paul Batesel also argues that this could be the same person as Barrett, which I think puts this an interesting situation. The article has been expanded quite a bit since the AfD to provide with something that should at least pass WP:GNG so I change to a weak keep. TartarTorte 01:09, 13 January 2022 (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.