Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Kruize


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:29, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Steven Kruize

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable hockey player, fails WP:NHOCKEY. Played almost all his career in the Dutch league.   Ravenswing   19:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 22:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 22:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 22:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG as well.  Not seeing anything in the way of non-trivial coverage. Hell Google isn't even showing much in the way of trivial coverage. Resolute 22:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems to have played several games as a professional with a notable club. Doesn't that establish notability? Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:14, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. Notability is not inherited. Also, because notability is defined by coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject and cover them in non-trivial fashion. This player lacks that in spades. Resolute 05:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I was not suggesting that the subject inherited notability. It is my understanding that professional athletes who compete at the highest level are considered notable? I actually disagree with this consensus, but (for example) I have seen Olympic competitors kept even when they haven't been covered. Same with pro players of football, baseball etc. If this is no longer the case I hope the guideline has been changed and that the change can be cited so we can spread the word. Candleabracadabra (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The subject notability guidelines can only presume notability, and most (particularly those related to WP:NSPORTS) make only that claim. You are correct that that the SNGs have been treated in the past as if they assured notability rather than presumed it, but I've never felt that past mistakes justify future ones.  In this case, that presumption is being challenged and must now be supported by RSes. Resolute 21:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Beyond that, yes, Candleabracadabra, you're right: WP:NHOCKEY, as with the other sports subordinate criteria, establishes presumptive notability for players who've played at the highest level. Kruize is not one of these players; neither the German nor the Dutch leagues are considered "highest level."   Ravenswing   01:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not meet WP:NHOCKEY or WP:GNG as Ravenswing and Resolute have said.  Þórr Óðinn Týr  Eh? 22:13, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't meet NHOCKEY and can't find anything to pass GNG. -DJSasso (talk) 13:39, 9 January 2014 (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.