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.
Comment Found using the
ProQuest database: National Post: "Eeuwes is still kicking around; Argos 2nd kicker?", The Windsor Star "Lancers add solid kicker" and "Eeuwes puts best foot forward for Lancers; Kicker hits 5 field goals". I'm not sure if I am allowed to copy-paste the articles for others to see so I will sum them up instead. The first source is about 28 sentences long and talks about him attempting to make the Argonauts. The second source is about 13 sentences long and it sums up his career up to that point. The third source is probably the least relevant of the three for determining notability. It sums up the game, while also stating what Eeuwes did during it and listing his overall Eeuwes's stats for the game. It also has one quote each from a player and coach about Eeuwes's performance. Thoughts?
WikiOriginal-9 (
talk)
20:28, 10 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. Trying out for the CFL is not a notability criterion in and of itself — a person has to make the big league, not just audition for it, to clear GRIDIRON — and while the fact that a couple of sources exist for his CIS career with the Lancers isn't nothing, it also isn't enough in and of itself: a couple of sources could easily be shown for almost anybody who ever played football even at the high school level. To deem somebody at this level of play notable enough for a Wikipedia article just on the existence of media coverage, we would need evidence that he had substantially more coverage than most other players at this level could show.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:46, 12 November 2017 (UTC)reply
If he could show a lot more sourcing than most other people at his level of play could also show, then maybe. But that's not what's in evidence here.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:15, 25 November 2017 (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.
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.
Comment Found using the
ProQuest database: National Post: "Eeuwes is still kicking around; Argos 2nd kicker?", The Windsor Star "Lancers add solid kicker" and "Eeuwes puts best foot forward for Lancers; Kicker hits 5 field goals". I'm not sure if I am allowed to copy-paste the articles for others to see so I will sum them up instead. The first source is about 28 sentences long and talks about him attempting to make the Argonauts. The second source is about 13 sentences long and it sums up his career up to that point. The third source is probably the least relevant of the three for determining notability. It sums up the game, while also stating what Eeuwes did during it and listing his overall Eeuwes's stats for the game. It also has one quote each from a player and coach about Eeuwes's performance. Thoughts?
WikiOriginal-9 (
talk)
20:28, 10 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. Trying out for the CFL is not a notability criterion in and of itself — a person has to make the big league, not just audition for it, to clear GRIDIRON — and while the fact that a couple of sources exist for his CIS career with the Lancers isn't nothing, it also isn't enough in and of itself: a couple of sources could easily be shown for almost anybody who ever played football even at the high school level. To deem somebody at this level of play notable enough for a Wikipedia article just on the existence of media coverage, we would need evidence that he had substantially more coverage than most other players at this level could show.
Bearcat (
talk)
17:46, 12 November 2017 (UTC)reply
If he could show a lot more sourcing than most other people at his level of play could also show, then maybe. But that's not what's in evidence here.
Bearcat (
talk)
19:15, 25 November 2017 (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.