Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colin Osbourne


 * 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   delete due to WP:ATHLETE failure. пﮟოьεԻ  5  7  12:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Colin Osbourne

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Footballer who fails WP:ATHLETE and no sources provided to satisfy WP:N. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 06:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete League of Ireland is not fully professional, so does not meet WP:ATHLETE criteria. Dancarney (talk) 10:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; non-notable player who WP:ATHLETE. GiantSnowman 17:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable football player. --Carioca (talk) 19:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. While we've had a lot of precedents for mostly professional Premier Division players being kept; this player has only played in the second tier, and doesn't pass WP:N. Nfitz (talk) 03:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Cs-wolves  (talk)  05:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, the premier division is professional for not the first division.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Huh? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * User:Vintagekits is trying to establish that the FAI Premier Division is fully professional, due to one inaccurate report by the BBC. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Multiple sources you tool! x--Vintagekits (talk) 08:43, 6 July 2009 (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.