Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ksenia Kirillova

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. Tim Song (talk) 02:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ksenia Kirillova

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

Prod contested by creator. There's nothing in her competition history that indicates this woman has played at the level required by WP:ATHLETE Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. -- Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
delete. Nonnotable athlete (even not very pretty). Timurite (talk) 00:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite what you said on my talk page, I have no clue how a subjective opinion on another person's appearance matters one whit under WP:ATHLETE. I don't think that's the level of discourse we want to engage ourselves in. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 14:03, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- A person may be a lousy athlete but may be notable in other respects and hence deserve an article. My "subjective opinion" is that she is not. And I have to clue why my subjective opinion is less desereving than yours. Timurite (talk) 16:15, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is disgusting that you would mention someones appearance in a vote debating their notability. Just thought you should know. ~ Baron Von Yiffington ^. _talk ^. _contribs 18:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - She is a professional athlete. The question is whether she is really competing at the highest level of her sport. Her tournament activity shows competing at low level events. Her best WTA ranking is 1010. That's not exactly up there. She is mentioned in various news reports about junior tournaments like this. Altogether, this doesn't meet the guidelines for notability for me. -- Whpq (talk) 17:31, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - She is successful as a junior, see here for her junior activity. She has won 5 Grade A junior titles [1] (also please refer to the first link) and was part of the Russian Fed Cup and Helvetie Cup winning team, here and here. She's also successful in doubles, reaching the semi-finals in the prestigious junior Grand Slam twice (Wimbledon & Roland Garros) [2]. She has beaten many notable players in the junior circuit including Noppawan Lertcheewakarn, Laura Robson, Ajla Tomljanović and Timea Babos (please refer to here, change player activity from 2009 - 2010 to 2006 - 2010). Her low ranking can be explained, she doesn't play many WTA tournament, no ranking points for junior tournament that she competes in, no matter how many titles that she wins. According to here (View activity by year - 2009), she has beaten quite a number of higher ranked player including 1 in the top 500. It will also be a bit tough to find western coverage for a Russian player. Help should be requested at WP:RUSSIA. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 19:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as she has played in the following tournaments: 2009 Australian Open – Girls' Singles, 2009 Australian Open – Girls' Doubles, 2009 French Open – Girls' Singles, 2009 French Open – Girls' Doubles, 2009 Wimbledon Championships – Girls' Singles, 2009 Wimbledon Championships – Girls' Doubles, 2009 US Open – Girls' Singles, 2009 US Open – Girls' Doubles, 2010 Australian Open – Girls' Singles and 2010 Australian Open – Girls' Doubles. And with this the article meets WP:ATHLETE. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 02:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All juniors competitions- not the highest level of competition in tennis- or fully professional. She has never been in the main draw at a Grand Slam. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 02:14, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She has significant coverage in the media. Here is a small sample. BBC Sport Guardian AP article at CBS News Telegraph Montreal Gazette Repo-Box (talk) 15:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. She is only mentioned in passing by media sources. Coverage is not significant.--Pink Bull 16:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bradjamesbrown. None of the sources mentioned by Repo-Box have what I would consider significant coverage of the subject, and some of them have barely one sentence about her. If the subject achieves more as an athlete at the main adult level, beyond the junior level where she has mostly been competing so far, the article can be re-created at at that time. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:30, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Im mostly confirming with Whpq on this one. Shes professional no doubt about that. Her Tournamnets that shes participated in arent the best and that makes my keep a weak one. If consesnus steers deletion I have no objection towards that. Ottawa4ever (talk) 18:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I guess we waffle to different sides on this one. In looking at her tournaments, I've tried gauge using top level. Even for the WTA, there's top level tournaments, and minor ones, and as far as I can tell, for the senior circuit events, she's only been at a few of the decidedly minor ones. -- Whpq (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Junior level athletes are not inherently notable; they do not meet WP:ATH. I'm not seeing the significant coverage in reliable sources to make up for that. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:28, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only mentions are in passing, does not rise up to WP:ATHLETE either. JBsupreme (talk) 20:51, 11 March 2010 (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.