Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph Holden


 * 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. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 02:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Ralph Holden

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Very little information in this article Qpalzmmzlapq  &#124;  talk  &#124;  contribs  17:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:03, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Improve it rather than deleting it. Also, passes WP:NFOOTY as he played in Football League First Division which was a fully professional league. Another source about him . Joseph2302 (talk) 20:41, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL, needs improving, not deleting. Being a stub is not a reason for deletion. GiantSnowman 21:46, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - played at the highest level of English football, so passes notability guideline. As noted, though, the article as originally created is pathetic and really needs expanding -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:23, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:NFOOTBALL.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:09, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes NFOOTY, has played in a fully professional league or in a match in the competition proper (i.e. not qualifying rounds) of a cup competition which involved two teams both from FPLs. Article size is not a valid reason for deletion. Fenix down (talk) 09:04, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - invalid rationale for deletion. C679 09:53, 30 March 2016 (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.