Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Sieloff

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 no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Sieloff[edit]

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

Non-notable hockey player, fails WP:NHOCKEY, no evidence he passes the GNG. One of a long string of NN stubs thrown up by article creator, without apparent attempt to provide sources attesting to notability, as BLP articles require. Ravenswing 09:48, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A search did not turn up any sources to meet GNG and he also fails NHOCKEY. -DJSasso (talk) 13:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It wasn't too hard to find sources on him. He has moderately extensive coverage between his World Junior play, turning pro, being the youngest player to suit up in the AHL this season, and then almost dying from an ingrown hair. Canada Hky (talk) 18:50, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Link Return from injury
- Link Return from injury 2
- Link Missing this year's World Junior
- LinkTurning Pro
- Link Hockey News Profile about decision to go to Windsor
- Link Profile from his time in Windsor
- Link Turning pro
- Link Youngest player in the AHL

A couple of those would fail WP:ROUTINE and almost all of them (save the hockey news) would fails WP:GEOSCOPE in that they are local articles about a local player/prospect. And the world junior one has a single sentence about him so not in depth by any means. And one is a blog. -DJSasso (talk) 19:58, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral. I'm biased on this one since he is a Flames prospect. He might not quite be notable yet, but I do expect he will be soon. (Crystal balling, obviously). Reso lute 01:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ged UK 14:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Djsasso's analysis of the sources provided. May meet notability requirements within the short or medium terms, but it is premature. Hwy43 (talk) 20:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy Not yet notable, but chances are good he will be soon.204.126.132.231 (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've no objection to userfying the article. Ravenswing 21:05, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Still. The guideline linked to explain away the local sources refers to the coverage of an event, not a person. A FACTIVA database search reveals 358 separate articles. There are articles (profiles) within days of each other from papers in two different provinces (2012-12-04 Windsor Star US Gives Spitfire Sieloff a shot at world junior spot; 2012-12-05 Calgary Herald Flames prospect Sieloff a terror on Spitfires blueline). A Canadian Press Article on nhl.com (comes up in Factiva, but this one is linkable) (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=647216) . Canada Hky (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone willing to host if it's userfied? --BDD (talk) 19:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I will. He's a Calgary Flames prospect, which is my team/project. Wouldn't be hard to update and restore if it is decided to bring it back at some point. Reso lute 23:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness though, this seems a fair no consensus result to me. I could just as easily take CanadaHky's links and expand the live article. Reso lute 23:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per Canada Hky's sources. No point userfying when a useful article can already be developed. --Hockeyben ^{(talk -} ^contribs) 02:06, 5 February 2014 (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.