- 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. Consensus is that the sources presented are not enough to show notability Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Jana Kivell
- Jana Kivell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Appears to fail WP:GNG per only WP:ROUTINE sources. Despite decent volume of sources, none of them are more than mentions and stats. Fails WP:NHOCKEY by never playing in the any IIHF World Championships, in the top-level (the one that actually plays for The World Championship) or otherwise. Inline hockey has no known sport-specific criteria and must stand or fail by GNG. Yosemiter ( talk) 20:10, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: A superficial glance of the type all too common at AfD might provoke "OMG! Look at all the sources!!" responses. Yet not a single listed source discusses the subject as more than namedrops or routine sports coverage of the sort explicitly debarred by WP:ROUTINE. As the nom correctly states, the subject fails NHOCKEY, and there are no notability criteria in place for inline hockey. Ravenswing 21:04, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: fails WP:NHOCKEY. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 22:00, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete As per nom and Captain Raju. Fails NHOCKEY and SIGCOV. Would appear to pass NINLINEHOCKEY if it were ever to exist. DerbyCountyinNZ ( Talk Contribs) 04:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Actually does meet NSPORTS as they played in the highest level of the world championships of inline hockey. - DJSasso ( talk) 10:52, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: ... except that there are no criteria pertaining to inline hockey, nor does NSPORTS have general criteria covering sports not otherwise mentioned, except to reiterate the GNG. Playing in the inline hockey championships confers no more presumptive notability than the bandy or the team handball championships do. Ravenswing 14:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you want to get technical, the ice hockey criteria have been used for inline hockey for years in Afd discussions but that wasn't really what I was getting at. It is standard practice that competing at the highest level of the world championships in a sport or the olympics meets NSPORTS (even bandy and handball). If 18abruce is right that its still in 2 weeks then fine delete it. But in two weeks they will be eligible for an article. - DJSasso ( talk) 11:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- I think you would need to cite an example, AFD's such as
this,
this, or
this indicate that it is questionable whether the individual championships are notable (never mind trying to find details or coverage on the events). It seems questionable that the individual events in the upcoming roller games would be notable, never mind teams (and their members) that do not even have to qualify to participate.
18abruce (
talk) 16:38, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- To be fair those Afd's were part of a hundred or so spammed Afd's thrown up in a couple day stretch by a single user and a lot of them didn't get the eyes on them they needed and have already been restored as the other world championship ones had been kept. Teams having to qualify or not are irrelevant, as the players have to make the teams. That being said, it is probably irrelevant, there are enough deletes on here that I won't waste my time going through the hundreds of afd's I have been in to find the ones where we kept players because they were on a world championship team. - DJSasso ( talk) 18:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Delete per nom. Clearly fails both WP:GNG and WP:NHOCKEY. The subject is mentioned only in passing with no in-depth coverage found. - AuthorAuthor ( talk) 17:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Would not even pass NINLINE if it existed, there is nothing in this article that bears up to any notability standard. 18abruce ( talk) 20:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Weak keep based on WP:GNG. References for notability include 4 mentions in the Waikato Times, 2 mentions in the Fitness Journal, and 1 mention in Otago Daily Times. -- LauraHale ( talk) 14:15, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: One of the Waikato Times sources doesn't mention the subject at all. Two of them only drop her name in a photo caption of a team picture. One of them briefly mentions her in the sort of routine sports coverage explicitly debarred by WP:ROUTINE. The Fitness Journal cites are both photo captions on a montage page of athletes. The sum of her coverage in the Otago Times piece is "The New Zealanders did not have the same firepower but scored important goals through Gore’s Beth Scott and Jana Kivell to level the score." It can only be concluded that you either didn't bother to look at the cites you claim pass notability muster, or you should refresh your recollection of the GNG, which holds that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." (emphasis in the original) Ravenswing 18:13, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG NealeFamily ( talk) 03:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:55, 15 August 2017 (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.
- 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. Consensus is that the sources presented are not enough to show notability Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Jana Kivell
- Jana Kivell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Appears to fail WP:GNG per only WP:ROUTINE sources. Despite decent volume of sources, none of them are more than mentions and stats. Fails WP:NHOCKEY by never playing in the any IIHF World Championships, in the top-level (the one that actually plays for The World Championship) or otherwise. Inline hockey has no known sport-specific criteria and must stand or fail by GNG. Yosemiter ( talk) 20:10, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:39, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: A superficial glance of the type all too common at AfD might provoke "OMG! Look at all the sources!!" responses. Yet not a single listed source discusses the subject as more than namedrops or routine sports coverage of the sort explicitly debarred by WP:ROUTINE. As the nom correctly states, the subject fails NHOCKEY, and there are no notability criteria in place for inline hockey. Ravenswing 21:04, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: fails WP:NHOCKEY. Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 22:00, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete As per nom and Captain Raju. Fails NHOCKEY and SIGCOV. Would appear to pass NINLINEHOCKEY if it were ever to exist. DerbyCountyinNZ ( Talk Contribs) 04:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Actually does meet NSPORTS as they played in the highest level of the world championships of inline hockey. - DJSasso ( talk) 10:52, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: ... except that there are no criteria pertaining to inline hockey, nor does NSPORTS have general criteria covering sports not otherwise mentioned, except to reiterate the GNG. Playing in the inline hockey championships confers no more presumptive notability than the bandy or the team handball championships do. Ravenswing 14:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- If you want to get technical, the ice hockey criteria have been used for inline hockey for years in Afd discussions but that wasn't really what I was getting at. It is standard practice that competing at the highest level of the world championships in a sport or the olympics meets NSPORTS (even bandy and handball). If 18abruce is right that its still in 2 weeks then fine delete it. But in two weeks they will be eligible for an article. - DJSasso ( talk) 11:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- I think you would need to cite an example, AFD's such as
this,
this, or
this indicate that it is questionable whether the individual championships are notable (never mind trying to find details or coverage on the events). It seems questionable that the individual events in the upcoming roller games would be notable, never mind teams (and their members) that do not even have to qualify to participate.
18abruce (
talk) 16:38, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- To be fair those Afd's were part of a hundred or so spammed Afd's thrown up in a couple day stretch by a single user and a lot of them didn't get the eyes on them they needed and have already been restored as the other world championship ones had been kept. Teams having to qualify or not are irrelevant, as the players have to make the teams. That being said, it is probably irrelevant, there are enough deletes on here that I won't waste my time going through the hundreds of afd's I have been in to find the ones where we kept players because they were on a world championship team. - DJSasso ( talk) 18:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Delete per nom. Clearly fails both WP:GNG and WP:NHOCKEY. The subject is mentioned only in passing with no in-depth coverage found. - AuthorAuthor ( talk) 17:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Would not even pass NINLINE if it existed, there is nothing in this article that bears up to any notability standard. 18abruce ( talk) 20:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Weak keep based on WP:GNG. References for notability include 4 mentions in the Waikato Times, 2 mentions in the Fitness Journal, and 1 mention in Otago Daily Times. -- LauraHale ( talk) 14:15, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: One of the Waikato Times sources doesn't mention the subject at all. Two of them only drop her name in a photo caption of a team picture. One of them briefly mentions her in the sort of routine sports coverage explicitly debarred by WP:ROUTINE. The Fitness Journal cites are both photo captions on a montage page of athletes. The sum of her coverage in the Otago Times piece is "The New Zealanders did not have the same firepower but scored important goals through Gore’s Beth Scott and Jana Kivell to level the score." It can only be concluded that you either didn't bother to look at the cites you claim pass notability muster, or you should refresh your recollection of the GNG, which holds that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." (emphasis in the original) Ravenswing 18:13, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG NealeFamily ( talk) 03:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 13:55, 15 August 2017 (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.