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. The "keep" !voters win this one. There is a consensus that the subject meets WP:GNG. Draft or no draft, significant coverage is significant coverage. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tomas Jurco (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Subject of article has not attained notability standards of WP:NHOCKEY or WP:GNG. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails to meet WP:NHOCKEY. -DJSasso (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Adequate sources within the article to demonstrate that he meets WP:GNG. Rlendog (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nomination. --Ozgod (talk) 19:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - He passes WP:GNG as demonstrated by the significant coverage he has received in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, including:
• The National Post feature article (January 2011)
• The Hockey Writers feature article
• The Hockey News headline article
• Detroit free Press feature article
• Dan Swallow's feature profile
• The Sports Network feature profile

The published feature stories (non-routine coverage) about this player pushes this article over the GNG threshold required for a stand-alone article. Dolovis (talk) 01:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• If there wasn't a draft going on, there would not have been an article on this guy. The list above shows that. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Many of these articles are from before the draft. Others are due to the fact that multiple reliable sources concluded that his being drafted was worthy of multiple full length articles. They provide significant coverage from multiple reliable sources. That there was a draft going on has nothing to do with GNG. Rlendog (talk) 20:38, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Dolovis cmt- plenty of sources, plus he was one of the potential first rounders who slipped into the top second round and taken as the top prospect by Detroit who had no 1st round picks. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:28, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Just routine coverage. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Most of these articles are full length articles specifically about Jurco. Nothing routine about that. A couple of the articles listed by Dolovis may not be reliable sources, but the others and the ones in the article are. Rlendog (talk) 20:38, 5 July 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.