Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ricky Elmore

:{{la|Ricky Elmore}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Ricky Elmore}})

Does not pass WP:ATHLETE; has not played in a major league game. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

• Keep looks like his college football career passes WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
• Delete I might have been willing to support a keep if he were all-conference, but he only made it as high as second team. I could be swayed to keep if there is more there that shows he meets WP:GNG. HangingCurve^{Swing for the fence} 02:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
• Delete All of the coverage is WP:ROUTINE. None of it focuses on him as an individual. Clearly does not meet the notability criteria for college athletes given at WP:NSPORTS. Papaursa (talk) 03:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
• Comment WP:NSPORTS is "inclusive" and not "exclusvie" -- see WP:ABELINCOLN.--Paul McDonald (talk) 05:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

:::Given that all of the coverage is routine, I still don't see the signficant, independent coverage required. So if he doesn't qualify under WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS, how is he notable? I'll admit I don't see the point of your ABELINCOLN reference. Papaursa (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

::::Because as I stated above, it looks to me like his college career passes WP:GNG. We obviously disagree on that, and that's okay. The point on the ABELINCOLN essay is that NSPORTS is meant to be an "inclusive" standard, but not meeting NSPORTS does not automatically mean a subject should be deleted.--Paul McDonald (talk) 05:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, causa sui (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

---

• WP:RELISTINGISEVIL consensus was clear before I struck my !vote.--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - I agree with Papaursa that the coverage is routine and does not satisfy the GNG; WP:ATHLETE is also obviously unsatisfied (never played a game as a pro athlete). cmadler (talk) 18:11, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep He led the Pac 10 in sacks the last two years and is second on Arizona's all time sack list. He was drafted into the NFL (something I believe automatically makes somebody notable) and is currently on the 49ers practice squad. I think that makes him notable enough.--Yankees10 18:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
• Being drafted is not currently considered enough to create a presumption of notability. See WP:ATHLETE, which gives Have appeared in at least one regular season or post season game in any one of the following professional leagues: the Arena Football League, the Canadian Football League, the National Football League, the third American Football League, the All-America Football Conference or the United States Football League, or any other top-level professional league. as the only option (aside from GNG) for a presumption of notability for professional football players. cmadler (talk) 20:40, 17 January 2012 (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.