Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andre Criswell

: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. LFaraone 04:48, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

=[[Andre Criswell]]=

:{{la|Andre Criswell}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Andre Criswell}})

Just another ex-football player for the University of Michigan with no apparent reason for inclusion in an online encyclopedia. 90% of the article is POV fluff anyhow. Jrcla2 (talk) 18:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Delete While I appreciate that a new editor is making a first time contribution, most college football players are not notable enough for their own separate articles. This one will live on in ask.com.Mandsford 21:10, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 23:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete fails WP:NSPORT and happens to be very poorly written. Sources fail to establish notability. -Drdisque (talk) 05:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's poorly written. People on Wikipedia who fancy themselves to be great writers are just kidding themselves, but the point is that anyone can contribute, and they improve their writing and research skills as they write about topics of interest to them. In this case, the issue is notability of the topic, rather than what a bunch of amateurs think about another amateur. Mandsford 01:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete does not appear to have met the threshhold of notability. The sources I do find are "pay-per-view" so I cannot read them (because I'm cheap). Would reconsider given a reason. By the way, "poorly written" is normally a reason to improve the article, not delete the article. Try another wiki?--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:49, 12 December 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.