Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serron Noel


 * 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 no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 20:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Serron Noel

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails to meet WP:NHOCKEY or WP:GNG. Sources that can be found are passing mentions or routine coverage. Can be recreated when/if they meet eventually meet NHOCKEY or otherwise achieve notablity. DJSasso (talk) 13:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. DJSasso (talk) 13:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete does not meet the notability guidelines for hockey players.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:38, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * But he meets GNG. Rlendog (talk) 00:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Except he doesn't. -DJSasso (talk) 16:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am seeing enough coverage for a GNG keep, with stories specifically about him in: The Athletic, Ottawa Sun, and another in the Ottawa Sun, nhl.com, South Florida Sun Sentinel, durhamregion.com, The Record, plus a Prospect Podcast from The Hockey News. Rlendog (talk) 00:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * All of those are not independent (especially the nhl.com one) or are routine coverage for a local getting drafted or a player being drafted to the local team (both of which have been held up in hundreds of afds as being considered routine). The podcast well that is definition of routine as all top draft prospects get draft profiles done on them. -DJSasso (talk) 16:38, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * We appear to disagree on what is routine. A list of scores and statistics are definitely routine. A simple list of who was drafted and when by whom would also be routine. A biography of the person being drafted is not routine at all, and whether the coverage is a big town or small town paper has no bearing on being routine. Flibirigit (talk) 08:25, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with Flibirigit. The Athletic article is not local, and there are profiles in localities ranging from Ottawa, Canada to Florida, USA.  We have sometimes regarded stories specifically about someone getting drafted as routine (although I disagree with that if it is a full blown article about the player) but one of the Florida articles is about the player subsequent from his draft coverage.  We have also regarded nhl.com as an acceptable source, and it should be, since if he is in the NHL then he meets NHOCKEY. Rlendog (talk) 14:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, player meets WP:GNG which supersedes WP:HOCKEY guidelines. Flibirigit (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   16:36, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, he meets the WP:GNG requirements Barrettsprivateers (talk) 05:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC, per Rlendog's sources. Ejgreen77 (talk) 05:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete we're in a period of sports saturation. I agree Rlendog's sources are significant coverage. But I also agree with those who are saying they're routine. There is not, in my view, coverage to establish notability under GNG. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:04, 15 May 2020 (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.