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. Wikipedia does not operate on a process of "if he may be notable in a few weeks, keep". If you wish to install such a policy, do so on a discussion page; do not make up rationales contrary to policy and guidelines on individual AfDs. Ironholds (talk) 16:31, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Meredith (soccer)[edit]

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

Fails both WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Was only drafted by seattle, in the second round, in 2011, and has never played a pro game. Contested PROD, with claim that he passed a different set of GNG for college athletes, of which I can find no proof. (See talk page for PROD contester's rationale). Ravendrop (talk) 08:54, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 16:01, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Since the only league he has played in is not fully pro, he fails WP:NSPORT. He also fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wait a few weeks. I have proposed this each year following the MLS SuperDraft, because this always happens. As I said on his talk page, because of the nature of US sports, drafts, and the nature of college sports and how WP:GNG notability for college players is always contentious, I'm advocating a blanket "hangon" for all articles on newly-drafted players until we get a little way into the 2011 MLS season. If players drafted this year who have articles haven't made their debut by, say, the end of April, then I'll support a mass cull of all articles on such players; waiting a little while allows people interested in these players to see their articles and obtain some information, but still gives us leeway to follow the appropriate notability guidelines later. It also saves editors from having to go through the busy work deleting and re-creating articles which could be time better spent doing other things. I realize that this is technically a violation of the guidelines, but I'm just asking for a little, time-limited concession. --JonBroxton (talk) 20:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for right now - I agree with Jon, wait for a while and see if he makes his professional debut. – Michael (talk) 15:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep I do not consider the player to be notable enough for an article at this point in time. But Jon's suggestion, if followed through on a league-wide basis, has the potential to give us a relatively drama-free method for deleting those players that don't make the grade once the season is in full flow. So my feeling is to assume good faith on Jon's part, and WP:IAR in the hope that he can turn his vision into an effective annual mechanism for the MLS draft. If it doesn't materialise in the time frame he has proposed, players such as this should be renominated and deleted unless they have established themselves in the first team. —W F C— 21:14, 5 February 2011 (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.