Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Randall


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Dan Randall

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No evidence that he's ever played professionally in the NRL (Jim Beam Cup is not fully professional), or if he's still on a pro team squad. Minor coverage in a minor local newspaper. The-Pope (talk) 14:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- The-Pope (talk) 14:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- The-Pope (talk) 14:46, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - He was part of the winning team for the Newcastle Rugby League, which appears to be a major competition. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:55, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete – fails the rugby league section of WP:NSPORTS found here and the sources aren't about him, they are about the team that won the Newcastle Rugby League, which is a semi-professional competition. Also I'm quite confident that every person who won the Grand Final would have been mentioned in those newspaper articles that are used as sources and yet they don't have wikipedia articles. However, if he did end up getting a game for the Storm next season (seems unlikely) then this article should obviously be recreated. Jenks24 (talk) 08:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Hasn't played in the top level, only in a local league. Lacks significant coverage in independent sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:01, 18 October 2010 (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.