Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian Davis (rugby league)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) —UY Scuti ^Talk 17:36, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian Davis (rugby league)

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

Fails WP:RLN as has not played a first grade game of rugby league or an international test match. Not enough coverage to meet GNG Mattlore (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, a quick Google search reveals significant coverage of the player from The Courier Mail, Sydney Morning Herald and Newcastle Herald. There are plenty of other trivial mentions in match reports and the like. While being aware of OTHERSTUFF, he is clearly more notable than a lot of the English footballers that have articles, so I'm leaning towards a keep. On the other hand, I think it is more likely that we are simply too inclusive on footballers! Harrias ^talk 21:16, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Clearly fails WP:RLN, but a surprising amount of coverage meets GNG. Doctorhawkes (talk) 21:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 00:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question, are the NRL Auckland Nines a fully professional competition? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 02:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Keep, on further reflection, I think that he meets the spirit of WP:RLN, if not the exact words, having played in the National Rugby League Nines. The surprisingly good sourcing tips it over the edge for me. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:07, 17 February 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.