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. Jayjg (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Reece[edit]

Ryan Reece (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Found as BLP prod; I found good documentation for his college career, but there are only extremely weak web sources for the remainder. There seems to be COI involved as well, and this seems a little odd in context, but its not my subject DGG ( talk ) 23:21, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Yes, the whole thing is rather odd. If he's an international, he's automatically notable, but I can't find any results. It's plausible that he made his debut in 2006 - there was a mass retirement of T&T players. Still looking. StAnselm (talk) 00:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How is this enough for notability? BK Avarta are not fully pro, and appearances for youth national teams are generally accepted as not confering notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I as going on the basis of BK Avarta being fully pro, as the Trinidad connection clearly does not bring any notability. According to List of professional sports leagues, only the Superliga and Division 1 are fully pro (Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues only lists the Superliga) so in the absence of hard evidence that this club is different, I'm changing my vote. StAnselm (talk) 03:09, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article will be made verifiable, no need to nominate for deletion —Preceding unsigned comment added by True Reece (talkcontribs) 10:00, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware that this claim is a clear violation of WP:CRYSTAL. We must therefore not treat it as verifiable until it actually is. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. Article will be made verifiable, no need to nominate for deletion —Preceding unsigned comment added by True Reece (talkcontribs) 11:01, 25 May 2010 (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.