Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mishel Gjorgjiev
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
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. Michig (talk) 09:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Mishel Gjorgjiev (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)
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:52, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:53, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 09:54, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Macedonia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - has not played in a fully pro league or represented his country at senior level, which means the article fails WP:NFOOTY. Also fails WP:GNG due to lack of in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Mentoz86 (talk) 09:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Walls of Jericho (talk) 16:42, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This could have been almost speedily deleted consider it lacked any credible assertion to notability or had any reliable sources. Mkdwtalk 05:58, 17 June 2013 (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.