Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Pawelek
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Mark Pawelek (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable minor league player whose career now seems done; never got past single-A ball. Nothing beyond passing mentions in the news. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Although many sports (basketball and American football to name a few) have a standard policy of regarding all professional players as notable, I believe for baseball it is common to only include players who have played in the highest level in their country.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Does not seem notable anymore; no major career accomplishments, no significant media cover. I do not even think he plays on any MiLB or MLB system anymore. -- StarScream1007 ►Talk 22:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Most other sports confer inherent notability on 1st round draft picks. But baseball doesn't, and as a late 1st round pick who never got past A ball, doesn't seem to be a good reason to retain. Rlendog (talk) 00:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Fails WP:BASEBALL/N by having never played at highest level. Fails WP:GNG with no significant coverage in independent reliable sources. —Bagumba (talk) 09:46, 29 May 2011 (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.