Talk:Matt Landers

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 15:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that after playing football for three different high schools, Matt Landers played for three different colleges? Source: The Athletic (which discusses his three high schools; it may be subscription-required, so 247Sports could also be used (click "High School" under his name to the top left)) - this source verifies his three colleges
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/WDCA
  • Comment: I believe I might have nominated this slightly too late; however, I'm hoping that it can be extended under Wikipedia:Did you know/Supplementary guidelines section four clause D9, which states The "seven days old" limit can be extended for a day or two upon request.

Moved to mainspace by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Matt Landers; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @BeanieFan11: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Hasn't made the roster, hasn't played a pro game.

Let me know if I'm missing something here. But his college record looks only a bit above average, and his NFL record is non-existent. Why is this guy notable?

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 15:52, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

• @Smallbones: We no longer base notability on whether someone has played professional football, only whether the person passes the general notability guideline is taken into consideration - and he does seem to pass it - see for example references two, four, and five in the article. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:12, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Except for the Athletic article (footnote 2) everything seems to be routine coverage of somebody with potential. But unless you have a subscription to the Athletic you can't read past the first few paragraphs (which say nothing of his accomplishments) - it's all about potential. Footnote 4 looked promising - he actually *threw* a touchdown pass. But 100's of college players throw touchdown passes each year. Then the spoiler showed up - the story was about a spring practice game. Reports about team practices are the ultimate in "routine coverage". Then there is footnote 5 - about his high school signing with Georgia. Not an achievement, just a routine story about potential. The final blow IMHO is the final footnote (12) from the team that signed him. You might actually say that getting signed to an NFL club is an achievement (not really though). He is one of 25 undrafted players signed by the club. There will be 100's of similar players in the NFL this year who wont ever make the roster or play a game at any level ever again. There's just nothing that he's ever accomplished, other than being noted for his potential. Can we say WP:Toosoon? Smallbones_(smalltalk) 17:04, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
    • @Smallbones: The general notability guideline says nothing about discounting sources discussing "somebody with potential" and WP:ROUTINE only applies to establishing notability for events. The fact that he "hasn't accomplished anything" (which is just your opinion - a successful college career and being signed to the NFL are certainly accomplishments in my view) is totally irrelevant to whether he warrants a Wikipedia article. All that matters is whether the sources discuss him "directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content" - as they do here. You may nominated him at WP:AFD once he's done appearing at DYK if you'd like; I still hold that he's notable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)