Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delvon Roe


 * 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. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. However, being a BLP more participation would have been helpful. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Delvon Roe

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

College athlete, fails WP:ATHLETE. No indication of meeting either the general or athlete specific notability requirements. TexasAndroid (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 18:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Google news search demonstrates significant third party coverage. Gigs (talk) 01:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep WP:ATHLETE is met with 'People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships.' Now that many professionals compete in Olympics/WCs (e.g., over last 20 years) the highest level in the US is top flight NCAA basketball.  Roe is a starter for a team in a BCS conference and started in two final fours (and one title game).  This meets the prong from WP:ATHLETE and therefore the article should be kept.RonSigPi (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep extensive non-trivial third party coverage, thus meets GNG -Drdisque (talk) 01:55, 16 June 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.