Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Aviet (Squash Player)

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. Tone 20:55, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Aviet (Squash Player)

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

I can find no significant coverage in reliable sources to indicate that this person meets the general notability guideline. Though there appears to be a junior squash player by this name, I'm finding no evidence to support the claims of competing at a national level that would satisfy WP:ATHLETE. Gonzonoir (talk) 07:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 07:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can get proof of him playing at national level. I can get the draws of two Australian Opens, as well as the International Milo All Star tournament, clearly showing his name.Ilikesquash (talk) 10:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:18, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails GNG and ATHLETE -Drdisque (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as article fails WP:ATHLETE. (By the way there is another article with the same subject: Josh Aviet (squash player)) Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 15:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, copied from this AfD's talk page:

I can send forms showing his participation in two Australian Junior Championships, as well as the international event the Milo All Star 2010, which comprised of 14 different countries.Ilikesquash (talk) 08:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, although this might be helpful in verifying some of the article's claims, unless this information has already been published in reliable sources it would not help to satisfy the notability grounds on which the article's deletion is proposed. I'll move your comment to the main deletion discussion page so that others can see it. Gonzonoir (talk) 15:32, 28 June 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.