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. No arguments have been presented to counter the deletion rationales after two weeks, so I think closing this as delete is appropriate. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Zanidean[edit]

Mike Zanidean (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

In spite of the care that went into making this article seem to comply with Wikipedia's notability requirements, it does not. Here is the only mention in a reliable source. Deprodded. Abductive (talk) 02:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I'm going to have to look at WP:ATHLETE as the category and he fails that. Could almost argue that he falls under WP:ENT. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 16 July 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.