Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taylor Ellington


 * 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 argument that "he may be notable in the future" is not and never has been valid at AfD. Ironholds (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Taylor Ellington

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested Prod - Non-notable hockey player who has not yet established himself to meet notability requirements per WP:NHOCKEY. Larkspurs (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Confused. The article states that he was a second round entry level draft pick by the Vancouver Canucks, but I can't find anywhere that says he actually played a game. Player Log Current Roster, although he was a part of the team at one point. I also looked at the roster (past and present) for the AHL team Manitoba Moose but the current roster does not have him listed. The past rosters do have him listed though, here is his player stat page.  So I actually don't know what to do, maybe keep but with a heavy rewrite?  Bluefist  talk  03:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: He's only 18 games short of qualifying under NHOCKEY, but that he's just played 18 games this season in the ECHL and isn't on the current roster doesn't inspire confidence. I'd lean towards Delete.   Ravenswing  15:25, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Apparently, he is missing from the roster as he is currently on the 21-Day injured list. Aside from being 18 games short of being able to qualify under WP:HOCKEY, how much weight would him being on the 2010 ECHL All-Star Game have? -Pparazorback (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * He didn't play as a starter, so by the definition of WP:NHOCKEY, thats still not enough to make him notable. Ravendrop (talk) 17:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The all-star team portion is not covered by WP:NHOCKEY at this time. The only reference to All-star is for lower level leagues and first-team all star which afaik refers to if the player made the end-of-year first all-star team and not the all-star game itself.  For the record, I am leaning toward delete at this time, but only if him making the all-star team does not help his notability for inclusion.  Even though he is only 18 games shy of making the 100 game threshold which is doable this season, he appears to be injured and probably won't make it to his 100th game this season.  -Pparazorback (talk) 23:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Another article that was created under the old parameters of having simply played in one pro hockey game. An article of this size can easily be recreated once he meets the current criteria. – Nurmsook!  talk...  18:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Seems redundant to delete at this point only to have it crated in later this season or next season when he playes the final 18 games needed.--Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 19:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That "when" being the big problem. The guy's on a medium-term injury list and has played less than half the season to date as it is.  This sort of situation is why WP:CRYSTAL exists.   Ravenswing  03:15, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Personally this is the kind of article I would have left alone when I saw it because he is so ridiculously close to meeting the guideline. But since its been nominated now I have to vote delete. -DJSasso (talk) 22:44, 2 February 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.