This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Handpolk (talk | contribs) at 05:24, 4 July 2015 (Undid revision 669877148 by The Banner (talk) some things can be removed. this is one of them). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 05:24, 4 July 2015 by Handpolk (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 669877148 by The Banner (talk) some things can be removed. this is one of them)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Steve Badger (poker player)
AfDs for this article:- Steve Badger (poker player) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Completing nomintion on another editor's behalf, i have no opnion on the merits DES 03:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I nominated. Not notable. Winning a preliminary event at the WSOP does not meet the requirement for notability per WP:BLP1E. He has done nothing else notable, the rest of the article is fluff. There are what seem like three RS's but each simply says he won a tournament and then quotes his opinion on random stuff. We already knew he won the tournament and we know one event doesn't make you notable -- even if 3 RS's confirm you won it. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 03:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
*Weak Keep*Delete He fits under Wikiproject:Poker essay for notability and while that's just an essay, he did win a very significant event and is a bracelet winner. There are just enough references in which he's sought out for poker expertise by reliable sources that I'm barely on this side of the line. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 04:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
- FYI that essay is out of date. There is unanimous agreement on the project talk page for no longer automatically considering bracelet winners notable. Who exactly to consider notable we haven't agreed on yet. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 05:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America 04:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America 04:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks! If there's no longer consensus on that issue, then I'm over on delete.