Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brent Belecki


 * 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.  Citi Cat   ♫ 22:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Brent Belecki

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Player does not even meet the rather lax WP:HOCKEY notability guidelines in that he has played less than 5 seasons in a high level minor league and has not even reached 100 games. Most of his playing experience comes from the lowest level of pro/semi-pro hockey. Djsasso 18:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hockey-related deletions.   —Djsasso 19:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * KEEP professional hockey players pass WP:BIO ccwaters 19:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment But there is much debate about how far fully professional stretches. Alot of these leagues are not fully pro. The link above shows the hockey projects stance on it. In that they have to play 5 years or 100 games in a high level minor league like the AHL or ECHL. Or have won pre-eminent honours in a low level league like this player has played in. --Djsasso 19:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. He has played seven full seasons of professional hockey.  ECHL, Central Hockey League, American Hockey League, and UHL are all professional leagues.  With this, this information is easily verifiable.  -- JamesTeterenko 19:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral: The problem is that even within the project, we never gained consensus for use of that criteria as cause to AfD an article; the only consensus was as a rule of thumb to gauge whether a certain player merited one. Even if we had, we've no authority to override WP:BIO.  I'd like our criteria to be able to be used to AfD, but it'd be disseminating to claim that we'd signed off on it.    Ravenswing  19:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This is true. I mostly meant I was using that criteria as my reasoning instead of typing it all out. --Djsasso 20:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I believe there should be a moratorium on these AfDs until something more accurate passes with league athletes. This person meets WP:BIO but is quite obviously not notable. Smashville 06:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply: Which won't happen.  There've been a few attempts to tighten up notability criteria for athletes, and consensus hasn't been remotely close.  Too many sports, each with their own factions and their own notions as to what is notable or not; heck, just compare and contrast the relative importance of minor leagues in hockey, baseball, football and soccer.  There's no hope at all for Wiki-wide change unless the say is devolved to the various Wikiprojects.    Ravenswing  14:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:Notability (people) for athletes: Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports. Junior career included winning 1998 Memorial Cup posting 2.68 GAA, .916 pct in 3 round-robin games. Canuckle 18:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment That being said the Memorial Cup is not the highest level of amateur play. The World Junior Championships, The Olympics or The World Championships are the highest level. --Djsasso 18:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Granted. but WP:HOCKEY also says eminence in WHL is okay. Bilecki won top goaltender and WHL playoff MVP award that year...1997-98_WHL_season. I don't know if all players who won the Memorial Cup are notable, but some consideration should be given to those who achieved notice in winning the CUp. Canuckle 18:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, I missed that he won that award. Should move that info over to his article. --Djsasso 18:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I've just added it. ONly stumbled on the fact from the WHL season recap. Playoff MVP is listed as a sign of "preeminence" on WP:HOCKEY. Canuckle 18:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 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.