Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garrett Klotz

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:36, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Garrett Klotz[edit]

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG with WP:ROUTINE coverage of games and transactions. Gets a couple of non-routine mentions, without significant depth, for an incident where he had a seizure on the ice after fight while he was with the Philadelphia Phantoms. Did not play long enough in a well covered league to presume notability through WP:NHOCKEY and has no awards. Unlikely to make it back up to the NHOCKEY#2 level of coverage of leagues. Yosemiter (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet the notability guidelines for hockey players, which is what people known only for playing hockey must do to have an article on Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails GNG and the SNG for Hockey players. Per JPL's comment above, EVERY subject falls under the aegis of GNG and can be passed on that basis; there is no limitation to consideration under SNG parameters. Despite his misperception of that fact, we agree on this result. Carrite (talk) 13:25, 1 November 2017 (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.