Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Pelech

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Pelech

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG with only WP:ROUTINE sources about him. Fails WP:NHOCKEY by not playing in a high enough league for long enough to presume notability and despite his 500+ games in the ECHL, he has never won an award. He gets mentioned in other articles about his NHL-playing brothers, Matt Pelech and Adam Pelech, but not much significantly about him specifically. Redirecting to either one of brothers seems problematic as neither is really about Michael. Yosemiter (talk) 15:31, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 16:41, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 16:41, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The product of an editor who ultimately received a community ban on new article creation for the many hundreds of NN articles (often in open defiance of both community consensus and appropriate notability guidelines) made to bump up his page creation count. As with the vast majority of these articles, the subject here is a journeyman hockey player in the mid-minors with an undistinguished, if long, career. Fails NHOCKEY, no evidence he meets the GNG beyond routine sports coverage explicitly debarred from satisfying notability. Ravenswing 06:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails to meet WP:GNG as far as I can tell and doesn't meet WP:NHOCKEY either. -DJSasso (talk) 11:07, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NHOCKEY and is mostly mentioned in passing. -- Dane ^talk 20:17, 22 September 2017 (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.