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. Nomination withdrawn. Black Kite and and Camw have convinced me that James Fraser passes WP:ATHLETE. Thank you both for your insightul comments (non-admin closure). Cunard (talk) 05:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

James Fraser (footballer)[edit]

James Fraser (footballer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

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

Non-notable football player. G4 speedy was declined because this is about a different person. I haven't been able to find any reliable sources about Fraser, and the team he played for is red-linked (likely non-notable), so I have brought this article to AfD. If someone could demonstrate how he passes WP:ATHLETE or provide third-party, reliable sources about this individual, I will withdraw this AfD. Cunard (talk) 22:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Whilst I am unsure about the professional status of the game in the 1890's, I presume that playing for one's country - even if only once - would pass the bar of notability. The SFA and RSSSF links (both reliable sources) - prove this. Black Kite 22:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm starting to feel that this person's notable. I misread the part about him playing in the 1890s; I read it as 1990s. That would explain the lack of in-depth online sources. I'll leave this AfD open for a little longer to see if there are any comments about whether or not Fraser played professionally. Cunard (talk) 00:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. —Cunard (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. —Cunard (talk) 00:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Per the reasoning in Black Kite's comment. Even if the sport wasn't professional in the 1890s, an international appearance should be enough to satisfy the "highest amateur level of a sport" criteria of WP:Athlete, since 1891 was prior to the modern Olympic games starting. Camw (talk) 00:47, 24 August 2009 (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.