Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Seguin


 * 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, with recreation encouraged when notability has become a bit better established. Regards,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 14:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Tyler Seguin

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable junior player who has yet to play professionally so fails WP:ATHLETE. Can be recreated when/if he plays professionally or otherwise achieves notability. Also fails WP:HOCKEY's ice hockey player notability essay. Players at this level are routinely deleted. No predjudice against recreating when/if he gains more notability. DJSasso (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions.  —DJSasso (talk) 15:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's pretty clear he fails of the notability hurdles so far. No prejudice against recreation, especially since he'll likely be a first round pick this summer, but a lot can happen in six months.   Ravenswing  15:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per faily ATHLETE. I've userfied and would move it to the creators userspace if they return and desire it.  Grsz 11  16:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep If he indeed fails 'notability' standards, then the standards need to be reanalysed.  Anyone that remotely follows hockey knows the 2010 NHL Draft has been described as "Taylor or Tyler??"  Numerous reports comment on that he is a blue-chip prospect for the NHL. E.J. Maguire, the director of Central Scouting said Seguin, Hall, or Cam Fowler could be the number one overall draft pick based on the team's needs that hold the first overall pick.  Anyway you slice it a potential number one overall draft pick is 'notable'.  I saw that Jerry D'Amigo's page was deleted as well and even though I don't agree with that, I can understand it.  Plenty of players had and amazing WJC and are out of hockey, especially sixth round picks.  (if it's possible to userify his page, I'd like that :)  I digress.  Unlike D'Amigo, however, potential first overall draft picks are 100% notable.  If players like Benjamin Conz and Nino Neiderreiter are 'notable' because they were on the WJC all-star team, being mentioned as a potential number one overall pick with a high likelihood of NHL success is notable.  Captain Courageous (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You need to read WP:CRYSTAL. We don't create articles based on potential. Once they are playing and once they have had success we add them. Alot can happen in 6 months. He could have a car accident and die, or any number of things. Or he could be a complete bust and never play professionally which has happened with 1st round picks in the past. As for userfying, once he is drafted if he is drafted in the first round I would be more than happy to undelete the page as we have done in the past in such cases. -DJSasso (talk) 17:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks mate. Although being a second Len Bias would be noteworthy, I get what you're saying.  Maybe I just have 'lower standards.' ;)  I still think he is most certainly noteworthy and will be noteworthy if he were to falter out of the NHL picture or (obviously) if he became a perennial all-star.  He's been talked about for years, so I would see him being noteworthy regardless of how his career turns out.  Would the same thing (undeletion) be done for D'Amigo if he were to make the TML? Captain Courageous (talk) 17:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I undelete any of the junior players we delete once they meet out standards. We usually delete a huge number around the World Juniors and the Draft, so we are pretty used to it. And you are right, he may end up notable either way. This nomination isn't a reflection on the creator of the page or the quality of the page at all. -DJSasso (talk) 17:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Certainly understandable. I love seeing seventh rounders get wiki pages, ha ha :)  I'm also not the creator, I just thought that he seems quite notable to me (and most hockey fans).  I respect the standards; doesn't mean I cannot disagree with them :) Captain Courageous (talk) 03:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * As DJ's said, there are any number of "can't miss" prospects in sports history that never have done anything; give me ten minutes, for instance, and I'll feed back a list of top ten first round draft choices who've never been in a NHL uniform. Just picking at random (the 2005 entry draft), the 2nd highest ranking goalie by Central Scouting - and this is the final rankings, not the mid-season rankings - is a rookie pro this season who's the backup goalie for the Laredo Bucks and the 3rd highest ranking European skater's never played North American pro hockey.  Go back a year to the 2004 midterm rankings and the top fifteen turn up never-weres like Vaclav Meidl, Ryan Garlock and Evan McGrath.   Ravenswing  19:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Ohh certainly. Goaltending positional rankings is very sketchy at best.  I think someone by the name of Marty Broduer was drafted after the mercurial Travor Kidd.  And certainly there are plenty of mid-first round picks that don't pan out.  But Hall/Seguin/Fowler will likely all be in the NHL next year.  The top three skaters rival Kane/Turris/JVR.  And if one of them turn out as the next Patrik Stefan, well that is indeed notable :)  I just think if you have that much hype following you for a couple of years in the junior ranks, translating into a top draft pick, you're notable, especially if all you need is a first round draft pick to be notable a la Steve Bancroft. :)  No worries, mate :)  Captain Courageous (talk) 03:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. If he achieves some notable accomplishment as a junior (he's currently tied for first in the OHL for scoring) or is a first round draft pick, the article can be re-created.  Patken4 (talk) 22:34, 12 January 2010 (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.