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. Very interesting discussion that seems to have uncovered an ambiguity in WP:NHOCKEY that bears analysis. Ultimately I think the arguments that the subject doesn't meet the GNG overrule the questions about meeting the bar of NHOCKEY. No prejudice against re-creation of the article if better sources can be found. A Train^talk 09:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Daniel Echeverri[edit]

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

Non-notable ice hockey player 18abruce (talk) 18:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Played on the Colombian national team and thus satisfies WP:NHOCKEY regardless of the magnitude of the tournament. Smartyllama (talk) 13:07, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is incorrect, national team in WP:NHOCKEY refers to the top level tournament. And since Colombia has never entered, or been allowed to enter even at the lowest level, it is irrelevent anyway.18abruce (talk) 18:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't. It just says "played on a senior national team" and then gives examples of which tournaments are acceptable, such as the Olympics and World Championships, but those aren't the only acceptable ones. As long as he's played for a senior national team in some tournament, he qualifies. Smartyllama (talk) 13:50, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, no you are incorrect. The quote you are relying on only lists top level tournaments so such as does not apply to exhibitions for nations that are trying to develop a national team. In the past it has not even applied to Division I nations.18abruce (talk) 14:24, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://archive.naplesnews.com/community/banner/aiming-higher-daniel-echeverri-wins-ice-hockey-gold-for-colombia-36ab43a5-a003-0697-e053-0100007f2ce-385393201.html Found this. There's probably more coverage of Echeverri in Colombian media. --Hockeyben ^{(talk -} ^contribs) 14:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: And if coverage satisfying the GNG that isn't the sort of routine sports coverage explicitly debarred from counting towards notability can be found, I'm all for it, but we can't support an article with insufficient references on spec. 18abruce is also absolutely right that it has always been the case that presumptive notability to playing for a national team comes only with playing for a senior national team competing in the medal pool of the Olympics and World Champions, whatever the nomenclature (Division 1/Medal round/"A" pool) attached in any given year. Ravenswing 19:08, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Regardless of interpretations of NHOCKEY, he does not appear to meet GNG even after looking through Colombian coverage of the Pan American tournament. He gets a couple of mentions about leading the score sheets for Colombia but most of their on-line coverage is just blurbs about their team winning the tournament. Nothing about Echeverri himself that I can find. Yosemiter (talk) 22:23, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I found this piece, which I think is a start towards meeting GNG (assuming this isn't a blog portion of the paper; I don't think it is), but not enough by itself. In the article the subject states that "Ice hockey isn't very big in Colombia," which isn't much of an endorsement for its national team conferring automatic notability. Rlendog (talk) 22:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rlendog: That article was mentioned above by Hockeyben and it would be a start, but on its own it is just WP:ROUTINE (it is from the local city paper where he goes to school). My deletion comment was based off a continuation of that article and Hockeyben's comment that there is "probably more coverage of Echeverri in Colombian media." However, I found none that apply directly to Echeverri himself. Yosemiter (talk) 01:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even if he did meet NHOCKEY (which I don't think he necessarily does as past discussions have limited the scope of national team to the championship level of the world championships and olympics). He fails GNG as I can find no coverage of him and the link above is purely routine of the local paper about local boy making good variety. -DJSasso (talk) 11:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, - WP:SPORTCRIT - "The guidelines on this page are intended to reflect the fact that sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics).", it doesn't say that the only major international amateur that counts is the Olympics, WP:NHOCKEY - "6.Played on a senior national team (such as at the Olympic Games or World Championship); or" it doesn't say "played on a senior national team in the Olympic Games and/or the World Championships", if that was the intention when this sng was made (as implied by some of the editors above) then surely it would implicitly say that. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The individual sections override the general sections of NSPORTS. That is actually the reason of splitting out the sports we do and deprecating the old WP:ATHLETE which did specifically say just the Olympics and world championships, because not all sports fit the same cookie cutter. As someone who was involved in the creation of the NHOCKEY guidelines (and has continued to be as they have evolved) , yes we have specifically meant they top level of the World Championships and the Olympics. In other words the levels at which every single athlete who competed at them is 99.99% likely to meet WP:GNG. The reason it doesn't explicitly says only World Championships and Olympics are because there are sometimes other events which rise to that level but are rare events such as Canada Cup and World Cup of Hockey. In the case of the World Championships, players who play below the Championship level very rarely meet the GNG. We should probably link to that section to make it clear, I thought we already did. -DJSasso (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The key there is what you take such as to mean; if I describe an animal's characteristics and say "such as a lion or a tiger (the most prominently known large breeds of cats)" and then someone tries to say that "okay a duck is included then, because it is also an animal" what would your reaction be? It should be telling that it says 'World Championship' in the singular because (at least on Wikipedia) that is indicative of only the top level. Things like the World Cup, Canada Cup no one would question, but things like the Thayer Tutt Trophy would be questionable (at best as an example of a lesser amateur championship) and should prompt a discussion to see if there are in the discussion of such as.18abruce (talk) 16:42, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thanks to Djsasso and 18abruce for their explanations. Coolabahapple (talk) 18:09, 29 September 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.