Contents

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Lucia: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:54, 2 July 2011

Topic of article has not attained notability standards WP:NHOCKEYorWP:GNG. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 17:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Doesn't meet NHOCKEY or GNG, or even come close. -DJSasso (talk) 18:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• 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:
• Fox News feature article on Mario Lucia
• First Round Bust feature profile on Mario Lucia (January 2011)
• McKeens Hockey featured article on Mario Lucia (March 2011)
• Dan Swallows featured article on Mario Lucia

The many published feature stories about this player pushes this article over the GNG threshold required for a stand-alone article. Dolovis (talk) 00:30, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I think you need to read up on what a reliable source is. Blogs which most of those are, and Q&A interviews are not reliable sources for proving notability. -DJSasso (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The Fox News story should be fine, although there is less there than meets the eye. The others listed above, I agree with DJSasso, are inadequate. I did find this [1] and this [2] and this [3] (which leads with Lucia, but also discusses other players). There may be just enough to meet GNG here, but for now I am on the fence. Rlendog (talk) 21:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I agree that the Fox News source is significant and reliable, and also the Star Tribune and Hockey News shown by Rlendog which allows this article to pass GNG. Oonissie (talk) 17:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]