Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chase Pearson

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 Delete--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 22:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chase Pearson

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

fails WP:NHOCKEY Joeykai (talk) 07:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:26, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as searches found nothing better at all. SwisterTwister talk 05:27, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:57, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No significant coverage to meet GNG and also fails WP:NHOCKEY. Being drafted and committing to play college hockey are not enough to show notability.Mdtemp (talk) 15:42, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - He's in a junior league. Where does that stand in WP:NHOCKEY ? DaltonCastle (talk) 02:05, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He fails NHOCKEY and GNG. Joeykai (talk) 03:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Honestly, @DaltonCastle:, if you have no idea of the notability criteria pertaining to hockey players, and you won't even take the thirty seconds necessary to follow the link you cite and read it to find out, you shouldn't be voting in related AfD discussions. In this particular case, the subject hasn't even played major junior, let alone climbed out of the amateur ranks, and fails the GNG and NHOCKEY going away. The article itself is the creation of a SPA with no other edits. Ravenswing 04:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment thank you for the judgmental tone, but my question arose from if the "Junior League" he was in was in fact within the "Played at least 200 games (90 games for a goaltender) or achieved preeminent honors (all-time top ten career scorer, First Team All-Star) in top-level minor leagues or second tier national leagues" parameter. DaltonCastle (talk) 05:15, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply And nothing prevented you either from finding out that information, or if taking the time to do that was too onerous, to not vote in the AfD. What possible basis could you have for advocating keeping the article? Ravenswing 06:12, 15 April 2016 (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.