Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keven Veilleux


 * 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. Shereth 21:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Keven Veilleux
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [|wpReason=&action=delete}} delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Amateur ice hockey player who fails WP:ATHLETE and is not otherwise notable.  Grsz  talk  01:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Week keep for barely meeting the WP:BIO guidelines, as he's "competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport".-- 02:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raj Krishnamurthy (talk • contribs)
 * Comment Hasn't yet played in a professional league. The QMJHL is not professional. -Djsasso (talk) 16:57, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, the QMJHL is not a professional league. While he was drafted by an NHL team, he has not played in the NHL, nor has he played for a minor professional team at this point.  WP:HOCKEY's internal guidelines only account for players drafted in the first round.  Veilleux was a 2nd rounder.  He'll very likely pass WP:ATHLETE in the future, but not today. Resolute 02:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hockey-related deletion discussions.
 * Delete: Yep. Odds that a second rounder will play pro hockey on some level are very large, but not certain.  He still has a year of junior eligibility left, and hasn't established the manner of game that would secure him a pro berth.    RGTraynor  02:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  Black  ngold29   02:57, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's very likely he'll be considered notable in the future, but until then, he does not meet the criteria to merit an article. --  t b c  ♣§♠   (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy)  03:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable athlete. U$er (talk) 05:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you care to explain on what grounds? It just strikes me funny, being he fails WP:ATHLETE.  Black  ngold29   05:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The point of this is to discuss how or why this person is notable. Simply saying he is notable provides no rationale. Please read Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, particularly the sections WP:JUSTAVOTE and WP:ITSNOTABLE. If you would like a good example, see User:GJohnston11's rationale for keeping. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom it fails WP:ATHLETE at this time. JBsupreme (talk) 06:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 06:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per failure of WP:Athlete and no other claims of notability. Vickser (talk) 06:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep He is currently under a three year contract with a professional team despite not playing. Has recognition due to playing for the QMJHL team at the ADT Canada-Russia Challenge, which is essentially equivalent to an all star team. GJohnston11 (talk) 16:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC) GJohnston11
 * Delete Fails to meet WP:Athlete or the WP:HOCKEY standards for inclusion. Can be recreated when/if he plays professionally. Just because he is under contract does not mean he will ever play professionally. Its happened a few times where this is the case. So to include him for those reasons would be a case of WP:CRYSTAL. The difference between the ADT Challenge and an Allstar team is that there are only 5 players on an allstar team and there are 25 or so on each of the two teams in the challenge. -Djsasso (talk) 16:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not a professional and has yet to win a significant award as a junior.  Patken4 (talk) 21:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete fails to meet notability standards. – Nurmsook!  talk...  23:14, 9 July 2008 (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.