Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julen Urigüen

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 | ^Talk 00:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Julen Urigüen[edit]

junior tennis player highly fits notability standards for deletion... 1 non functioning reference (doesn't load) Rmzadeh ► 03:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC) (corrected typo) -- Rmzadeh ► 17:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the nominator means that the article's subject does not meet notability standards? It is unclear from the nomination statement. Both of the article's references work for me, as do other refs like these: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Somno (talk) 09:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please note that I originally made a typo (added underlined words after finding out about it), the article is a good candidate for deletion as the notability is in question, the link is now working correctly for me however it is the only source of reference. when I google the article I get 2 reputable matching websites. due to the fact that it is about a junior league player and the reliability of the information given and the number of sources cites I believe that the article is a good candidate for deletion.-- Rmzadeh ► 17:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the nomination statement. :) Somno (talk) 05:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: I'm not sure why this was up for deletion; Google News gives me 130 hits. And sure, he's a junior player, but given that we have articles on the tournaments he's in (2009 Australian Open - Boys' Singles and 2009 French Open - Boys' Singles, for two), I don't see any reason why we need to turn his links red. I've added some more to his article and cleaned it up a smidge. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 23:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lots of articles about this player specifically. This is a very clear keep. Gigs (talk) 02:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As the two above said, there are plenty of articles talking about him, and that passes the general notability guidelines. Dream Focus 23:45, 12 June 2009 (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.