Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Roberts (ice hockey)


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 17:59, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Sam Roberts (ice hockey)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:NHOCKEY Joeykai (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep The subject of the article meets WP:NHOCKEY by playing in KH Sanok, top level Polish professional hockey club. Ueutyi (talk) 00:47, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The Polska Hokej Liga is not listed in WikiProject Ice Hockey/League assessment. He fails WP:NHOCKEY.Joeykai (talk) 03:15, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * He played for several AHL teams, which belongs to the list, does that meat criteria? I do not know if he played for 200 games or not, but he is a professional athlete and why do you bother deleting the page? Ueutyi (talk) 03:33, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, WP:NHOCKEY states that for Fully professional minor leagues (which WikiProject Ice Hockey/League assessment defines the AHL as), notability requirements are "Played at least 200 games (90 games for a goaltender)" or "achieved preeminent honors (all-time top ten career scorer, First Team All-Star)." Sam Roberts has played 5 AHL games and has received no honors. So, again, he fails WP:NHOCKEY. If he doesn't meet the notability requirements, then his page should be deleted. Joeykai (talk) 03:42, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Caution: Remember that if someone fails WP:NHOCKEY (or any other 'refined' notability standard) but passes WP:GNG they are notable. Not saying that's the case here, just that "fails ((WP:LOCALN))" shouldn't be used as a stand-alone deletion rationale. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - it seems a bit of an hole in WP:NHOCKEY/LA to not say anything about the Polish league - given the national team is at least as good as some of those mentioned. I know there is not a direct link between leagues and national teams, but it makes me wonder if this just reflects the interests of those involved in WP:NHOCKEY. JMWt (talk) 10:07, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It all comes down to how much coverage the various leagues get. It is very unlikely that every player that plays in the Polish league would meet GNG, which is what is needed to meet any of the criteria in NHOCKEY. -DJSasso (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The Polish Ice Hockey leagues get reasonable coverage in Polish media. JMWt (talk) 09:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The league might, but does every single person who plays only a single game in the league get coverage to the point they would satisfy GNG. I am sure some players probably do, but the question is does it give the 99.999% probability of meeting GNG to all players who have ever played in the league like the NSPORTS criteria try to adhere to. I find it hard to believe that players who play 1 game in the Polish league get articles written about them in depth to meet the GNG. -DJSasso (talk) 15:41, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * True, but a different point. The point you made above was that the NHOCKEY standard is based on the coverage that the leagues get. I'd venture that the coverage gotten by the Polish league is at least as much as some of the other national leagues mentioned. JMWt (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, bad wording on my part I suppose. When I said league I meant the players in the league. -DJSasso (talk) 20:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * JMWt, if you feel it is, by all means make the argument at the pertinent talk page. I presume you've some evidence to support the argument?  You speak as if you're familiar with the Polish-language media.   Ravenswing   03:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - Meh, I dont really consider WikiProject Ice Hockey/League assessment a valid notability reference, since it is a subjective 'Quality' ranked list of what the Ice Hockey Wikiproject think. EG the top level leagues in many countries are classed 'minor' leagues despite the players playing professionally at the top level in their country. As a comparison - if the football fans at Wikiproject Football was dominated by Germany, Brazil and Italy fans, and they got together and said playing in the Premier League in the UK was not notable enough, that reasoning would be laughed at. If a player is playing in the top level division of their sport professionally (as opposed to amateur) in their country, that should qualify. Only in death does duty end (talk) 11:32, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The list isn't based on quality of play. It is based on how much the sport and its players are covered in sources. While a league might be the top league in its country the sport might not be covered much or at all in that country. To meet #1 of NHOCKEY every single player in that league would have to have likely been covered in multiple sources. That just isn't likely in the case of Polish hockey. Heck it isn't the case in the majority of countries with national hockey teams. Remember, the only thing that truly maters is if GNG is met. That isn't the case for lots of players that play in top leagues in various countries. Only leagues where that is like to happen at a 99.999% likelihood are listed where they are. This works just like the rest of WP:NSPORTS does. -DJSasso (talk) 20:34, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Only in death's example is a false equivalency -- that reasoning WOULD be laughed at, because it's moronic. To continue with that example, however, no soccer fan in his right mind would include the Premier League, Serie-A or the Bundesliga in the same discussion with the Allsvenskan or the Ekstraklasa. Still, as DJSasso correctly points out, we judge leagues based on the coverage. Take, for instance, that the junior leagues appear on the list, possibly the only case in all of sport where teenage-only amateur leagues are accorded any measure of notability at all.  Yet those leagues are highly popular in Canada, and receive a great deal of press coverage.  In similar fashion, we accord a level of presumptive notability to United States top collegiate leagues -- which receive a good deal of coverage -- and none to Canadian collegiate hockey, which doesn't.  Nor is this decision solely ours: the degree to which this Polish league is obscure is mirrored in the fact that the Internet Hockey Database, the standard website to which the WikiProject links all player stats, doesn't get information from it. As far as whether you believe NHOCKEY/LA to be a valid reference or not, it is of course a free encyclopedia, and we won't force you to believe anything you don't wish to believe.   Ravenswing   01:05, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Despite the speedy above, this player does not meet NHOCKEY as the Polish league is not considered to meet the first point of NHOCKEY. And in doing a search I am not seeing anything that shows he meets WP:GNG either. -DJSasso (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails NHOCKEY, no evidence that this obscure player meets the GNG.   Ravenswing   01:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per DJSasso. Deadman137 (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2015 (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.