Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Rose (American football)

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 If he obtains notability in the future through playing in the NFL or another qualifying league, or through meeting GNG, the article can be recreated. Rlendog (talk) 19:58, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Rose (American football)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable for college career. Fails to meet WP:BASIC. Undrafted in NFL 2016 draft but was picked up by Giants. I was waiting to see if he made the team before nominating since if he made the team and played he would have been notable per WP:NGRIDIRON,; however, he was cut today at the 75-man-roster deadline. See http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2016/08/giants_cut_roster_to_75_analysis_of_each_roster_mo.html Meters (talk) 23:23, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete per WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NSPORT. It would be nice if this could just be sent to a draft, because in the event that this guy gets picked up by another team later and plays an NFL game, he would become notable.--Prisencolin (talk) 04:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~I have no objection to a draft article,~~ but it seems a bit unlikely that Rose will be picked up by another team given that he wasn't drafted, didn't play much in his three preseason games, and didn't survive the first round of cuts (from a 90-man roster to 75-man). There's still another larger round of cuts to come before the rosters are finalized at 53 men by 3 September. Meters (talk) 07:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Draft is fine if an enthusiastic editor wants to take custody of the article and work on it. My cursory search did not turn up significant coverage for his collegiate career. If others can search and find better results, I'll consider changing my position. Until then, we have a good quality college player but not necessarily a notable one. Delete and also try another wiki.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- On second thought, it only makes sense to convert to a draft if the subject is notable but the article content needs work to get to article status. If the subject does not qualify because the subject is not notable then it should not go to draft. No amount of work on the article will create notability. We should not keep articles around in draft just in case the subject later becomes notable.Meters (talk) 01:21, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He can still qualify via Gridiron. 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. Userfy to my account if delete is given. BlackAmerican (talk) 03:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NGRIDIRON. Also, some of the leagues mentioned above don't exist anymore, so unless subject has access to a time machine, he can't satisfy WP:GNG by playing in them. Smartyllama (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per failing WP:NGRIDIRON. If he ends up playing a game later, author should request article content via deleting admin then recreate. RegistryKey^(RegEdit) 09:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.