Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Imrie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. PeaceNT 08:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Andrew Imrie

Andrew Imrie (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails WP:BIO as never having played in a fully professional league - Taringa Rovers and Tamworth are both in amateur leagues. robwingfield «T•C» 14:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep Brisbane Premier League is a professional league. He played for Tamworth in the Nationwide Conference, a professional league.Jonesy702 17:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment per previous discussion, players who have only played outside the Football League are considered NN (the Conference is not fully professional). Can you source the Brisbane Premier League being fully professional? If so, he qualifies. EliminatorJR Talk 19:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. ChrisTheDude 21:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - the Brisbane Premier League is not fully professional, see these player profiles from the Taringa Rovers website, which clearly list the players' day jobs: [1], [2], [3], [4], etc etc. And the Conference is not fully professional either - overwhelming consensus is that a player who has never played above the Conference is not considered to meet the requirements of WP:BIO ChrisTheDude 21:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. The Brisbane Premier League is most definitely not fully professional. The only fully professional league in Australia is the A-League. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 00:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. John Vandenberg 00:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, nn football player. Lankiveil 02:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC).
  • Delete as per guidelines. There are some incidental mentions in local papers but nothing that would persuade me that he meets our guidelines. Capitalistroadster 02:54, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete until he gets multiple, non-trivial secondary references. First reference is a directory listing (provides verification) the second only mentions the subject in passing.Garrie 02:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Angelo 17:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per ChrisTheDude. Qwghlm 09:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Garrie. Subject fails to meet standards of WP:V. CloudNine 12:06, 29 May 2007 (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.