Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alenka Hubacek

: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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

=[[Alenka Hubacek]]=

:{{la|Alenka Hubacek}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Alenka Hubacek}})

fails WP:NTENNIS. no major tournaments and has not reached minimum 25K prizemoney standard. LibStar (talk) 08:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

:Weak Keep I don't think it fails WP:NTENNIS since she competed in the main draw in 2008 Australian Open – Women's Doubles. Nimuaq (talk) 20:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

::Comment The criteria for WP:NTENNIS was the subject of discussion here which is further modified as a result. However, it still doesn't state anything about wild cards and I'm not sure if the "competed in the main draw" statement includes wild cards or it is added to refer to the qualifying for the tournament (via rank or competing in the qualifying). Thus my vote is Weak. Nimuaq (talk) 22:20, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

:Delete If one main draw doubles appearance in her local major -- no doubt supported by a generous wildcard and in which she and her team-mate got hammered -- is the most that can be said for her notability, I don't think she warrants an article regardless of the technicalities of WP:NTENNIS. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

  • Strong Keep as she passes tennis notablity as per Nimuaq 194.66.216.40 (talk) 14:42, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

: Nimuaq said weak keep, why do you say strong? LibStar (talk) 00:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

— 202.124.88.24 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. its a dynamic ip. you have no clue how many edits I've mad. Focus on the content, not the contributor. 203.171.196.186 (talk) 23:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC) — 203.171.196.186 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 01:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete, while she meets the letter of WP:NTENNIS, I'm not sure that a single wildcard doubles appearance, where she was soundly defeated by an unseeded player, really meets the spirit of that guideline. As good a time as any to WP:IAR. Lankiveil (speak to me) 04:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC).
  • Delete. Non-notable tennis player. Keb25 (talk) 05:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete or userfy, but ensure admins are on hand to undelete if required in the future (ie she gets better, wins something etc). The-Pope (talk) 14:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete - I agree with Lankiveil that this is a case to ignore all rules. WP:NTENNIS is a guideline by which we use to gauge notability and should be used with discretion and consideration of the circumstances. Somebody qualified into the main draw either through ranking or winning their way in through the qualifiers has exhibited notability. Being granted a wild card isn't the same thing. -- Whpq (talk) 14:45, 3 May 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.