Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Cappuzzello


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 17:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

George Cappuzzello
Incomplete AFD found by User:DumbBOT. No opinion from me. -Royalguard11Talk 22:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable baseball player. References provide not one bit of interesting information. Won one game as a pitcher (lost two), had only one at-bat, not involved in any significant trades. Notability (athletes) should take note. -AED 23:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I would prefer to retain the principle that all Major League players are notable (which is basically what WP:BIO says rather than debate the notability of individual players. -TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 10:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep per TruthbringerToronto. Definitely do not want to set a precedent of deleting MLB players, they are inherently notable. -Elmer Clark 11:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - meets WP:BIO, and as a comment, being in MLB is an objective measurement that can easily be verified. -- Whpq 14:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep —  MLB is highest level in sport so passes WP:BIO, even if just for the proverbial cup of coffee. Anyway, he played over two seasons. JChap2007 17:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - profesional baseball player is enough for me. Wjhonson 18:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep All MLB players are notable. Plenty of people do care about this stuff.  Zagalejo 18:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. --CFIF ☎ 20:52, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is the type of article that can easily be expanded, by someone like myself, which I plan to do. -- Nish kid 64 00:20, 20 August 2006 (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.