Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Archibald

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 redirect to Jim Archibald. Clear consensus that we should not have an article on him now. The relist option came in toward the end, but I doubt many of those opting for deletion would have a problem with a redirect for now, particularly as it is true that there is current information on Josh Archibald over at Jim Archibald. Obviously if the son becomes notable we can recreate this. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 08:30, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Archibald[edit]

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

Subject of article has not attained notability standards of WP:NHOCKEY or WP:GNG. Archibald is a junior-level player without major award wins or other notability status. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 19:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Being drafted by an NHL team should imply notability. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ice hockey Ordoinc (talk) Ordoinc (talk) 07:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - No. Only first-rounders are likely to have notability. Lower-rounders are much less likely (like 5% chance) to achieve notability. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 14:08, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Don't go around making up ridiculous statistics. A recent study has found that 19% of drafted players go on to play over 200 NHL games.[1] For a player to play in just a single NHL game, or to otherwise meet one of the criteria of WP:NHOCKEY, is much higher. One need to only look at the evidence from past drafts (for example, the 2005 NHL Entry Draft where only 42 red lines remain from 230 drafted players, so 82% have achieved notability). Dolovis (talk) 14:39, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe we could modify it from first-round to later rounds conferring notability. But not here. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 19:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails to meet GNG or NHOCKEY. Can be recreated when/if he meets either. -DJSasso (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep was a finalist for the Minnesota Mr.Hockey Award --Hockeyben ^✉ 15:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Yes, but we don't include finalists or nominees, etc. in NHOCKEY. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 19:50, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete regardless of what % of drafted players play in the NHL, Uher has not done anything that appears to meet WP:NHOCKEY or WP:GNG. No rationale of being a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award conferring notability is established. Winning the award may confer the notability under the high school guidelines of WP:NSPORT, but not being a finalist. RonSigPi (talk) 18:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and enough speculation I'm surprised to see so much (repeated) discussion of whether this player will become notable or not, but it can stop right now. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball about the notability of players. Finally, the subject doesn't fulfill notability for amateur players, hockey players, and doesn't fulfill WP:GNG. The Minnesota hockey award isn't going to cut it for notability, either. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 06:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Jim Archibald, which contained sourced information about this player. Rlendog (talk) 17:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Rlendog. If subject ever meets NHOCKEY or GNG, article can be re-created. Patken4 (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Jim Archibald or failing that delete. Fails the notability standards hockey players and WP:GNG. The target has some sourced information so no good reason not to redirect. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:34, 21 July 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.