Deletion of Tim Pitman

Comment: fails  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NFOOTBALL)

Comment: player clearly fails  and .  Although all of the arguments laid out above by the creator/subject are extremely verbose, none relate to WP policy at all
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTBALL||WP:GNG)

Comment: It's someone known as a closing admin, unless the debate shows no sign of getting any delete !votes - in which case an ordinary (usually regular) editor can close after seven days. The closing admin or non-admin will have taken no part in the debate (except possibly providing neutral information). I don't know how the closing admin is chosen, or if they just come in and look at a list. For your information, it is good etiquette here to be logged in when you !vote (only one per oerson) or comment (as many as you like - but don't overdo it). The !votes and comments are weighed up by the closing admin (the non-admin will only have keeps to deal with), and a decision reached. If there is a mass influx of new accounts who have not edited anywhere else, they are given less weight than the known regulars - and may even be investigated to see if they are one person (see . They are called SPAs - single purpose accounts - and usually say the same thing over and over. They will be read, though, just in case they say something worthwhile. This is not a kangaroo court, and new 'evidence' can be added here or in the form of changes to the article (which should be notified here). We can and do change our minds. I've changed three times in one debate
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry (WP:SOCK)