Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vic Harris (snooker player)


 * 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 Default keep, no delete votes made (not even by the nominator). Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 04:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Vic Harris (snooker player)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Incomplete AfD listing by unregistered user who could not complete the process. Reason given was 'Lacks notability'. The original nominator also expressed that the number of major tournament wins in the infobox might be incorrect (or lacking a verifiable source). This is a procedural nomination. I abstain. -- S up? 13:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - Vic Harris's Player Profile, however the league that is named after him seems to have a lot more coverage. Torinir 14:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't know... The relevant stub category for snooker players contains hundreds of biographical entries. This one is average, neither very well-developed nor threadbare.  I'd just leave it alone. Yechiel Man  21:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * AfD should be based on the subject, not the article. Is the subject notable? Morgan Wick 04:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 06:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fuhghettaboutit 03:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Evil Spartan 23:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 02:47, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,


 * Close as keep. Nobody has actually asked for a deletion; even the original attempted nominator has not come back to provide their own recommendation to delete. --Metropolitan90 03:56, 14 July 2007 (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.