Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitch Robinson

Add links
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 keep. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 00:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mitch Robinson[edit]

Mitch Robinson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Despite claims to the contrary simply being picked in the draft does not make this person notable and therefore he appears to fail WP:Athlete as he has not competed at the fully professional level of this sport, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport. Once he has played at the fully professional level of this sport he can be recreated but until then this is just a crystal ball AFL stub. --VS talk 22:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep Won an award, 40th in draft. Seems like it might squeak by. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete His award needs to be kept in the context of Div.2 of the U18 championships, which featured the three weaker teams. This is slightly unfair in that he had no choice of the state he represented, but as a guide, Tasmania which won Div 2 went on to lose every Div 1 game. So I'm not convinced that winning this lesser award automatically confers notability. Again, if he succeeds and gains appearances at the highest level then notability in my view is assured, but not until then. Murtoa (talk) 01:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep On precedent. Similar arguments occurred last year and the year before after the draft, and each time the result was keep.Aspirex (talk) 11:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Every year we have the same debates, and every year we come to the same conclusion that it's a lot simpler to keep the articles. He will be on the list for the whole of next season, making him one of only 44 players to be able to play for Carlton next season. - Allied45 (talk) 01:11, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment This appears to pre-empt the outcome and is not helpful, particularly seeing that at least some of this year's articles are actually being deleted. "We" haven't necessarily come to the same conclusion this year. He may be on the list, but "every year" we see some of these players simply making no impact and reverting to relative obscurity. Murtoa (talk) 06:25, 6 December 2008 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mitch_Robinson&oldid=1069821758"