Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Prince


 * 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. v/r - TP 23:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Shane Prince

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject has not attained notability standard of WP:NHOCKEY or WP:GNG. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 21:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions.  —I, Jethrobot drop me a line 22:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The many published feature stories about Shane Prince pushes this article well over the GNG threshold required for a stand-alone article. Dolovis (talk) 03:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Hocket is not my forte, but upon reviewing the specific notability guidelines cited, I do not think the subject to be appropriately "notable" at this time. --Ozgod (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as he passes WP:GNG as demonstrated by the significant and non-routine coverage he has received in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, including:
 * |head Rochester Democrat and Chronicle feature article
 * Ottawa Citizen feature article
 * Faceoff.com feature article
 * The Syracuse Post-Standard feature article
 * Cyberpresse inc feature article
 * Delete some of the links Dolovis provided are duplicates of the same article. Not to mention they are all routine draft coverage which is a case of WP:BLP1E. -DJSasso (talk) 12:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No, none of the articles are duplicates, and none are what I would classify as "routine coverage" either. Dolovis (talk) 05:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The articles are only related to draft coverage. Where are the articles much prior to this time? Where are the awards? He placed 10th in OHL scoring. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Placing 10th in the OHL in scoring does not make one non-notable. Not winning a major award does not make one non-notable.  Not being drafted in the 1st round does not make one non-notable.  None of those things confer presumed notability under NHOCKEY, but none negate notability achieved under GNG through significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Rlendog (talk) 20:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep As Dolovis points out above, there's a solid case that he meets the GNG. Qrsdogg (talk) 20:16, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not solid at all. It's only related to the single event of the draft. &#x0298;  alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:48, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * He also received coverage prior to the draft. He received that coverage regardless of whether or not he was drafted. 20:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - I am still on the fence, though leaning towards keep, but I should note that both the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle and Ottawa Citizen also had feature articles about Prince before he was drafted. |topnews|text|Sports. Rlendog (talk) 21:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The articles are only related to draft coverage. Not prior. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The articles I linked to are dated June 21 and June 22. The draft didn't start until June 24.  Hence they were prior to the draft. Rlendog (talk) 20:52, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Shane Prince is the biggest story in Ottawa hockey right now. He's captured the hearts of the 67's community and has been drafted by the Ottawa Senators. Stories about him in the Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa Sun, give him GNG status!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullwinkle18 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not enough to be notable internationally. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete although later on I think this bio is likely to be kept as he was drafted by the Ottawa Senators, I think this should be deleted for now. WP:NHOCKEY says that 1st-round draft picks are usually presumed notable, according to the article he was drafted in the second round, which puts the notability in question. Minima  ©  ( talk ) 06:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is any question that this player fails all the presumptive notability criteria of WP:NHOCKEY. The question is whether despite missing the first round, and thus presumptive notability, he received enough coverage to meet the notability guidelines under WP:GNG. Rlendog (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * There was not an article on him specifically before the last few days and around draft time. Simply being drafted is not enough. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, simply being drafted is not enough. But being drafted and generating significant coverage in multiple reliable sources is enough. Rlendog (talk) 20:47, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * KEEP * I would agree that this player fails all the "presumptive" notability criteria of WP:NHOCKEY. However all one needs to do is Google "Shane Prince Ottawa Senators" to see that this is a remarkable individual worthy of being recognized and added the the great collection of Wikipedia sports personalities. Articles on this athlete are being added almost daily. It would be an injustice to deprive Wikipedia users of having the option of viewing details of Shane Prince. I don't see the point in removing this from the Wikipedia collection. Clearly Shane Prince has a huge following and is important in the Ice Hockey World. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullwinkle18 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Two things: 1. You already registered your 'keep'. 2. Are you a member of his family? Leave off the hyperbole. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 17:45, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No need for the sarcastic question either.--EdwardZhao (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Has received enough news coverage to pass general notability guidlines. Borderline, but passes in my opinion.--EdwardZhao (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2011 (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.