Deletion of Charlotte Gurr

Comment: meets . I would say easily because there's an incredible of routine coverage of her (match reports and the like) as well, but women's football isn't covered as in depth, so had to dig to find the better articles (one of these is a match report but she's clearly covered.) Would be unfortunate if this is deleted, she's had a good and noted career. https://www.theargus.co.uk/sport/14164809.charlotte-gurr-eyes-goal-target-after-two-against-tottenham-hotspur/ https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/8183634/charlotte-kerr-injury-man-utd-charlton-women-ribs/ https://www.thefa.com/news/2018/feb/15/womens-fa-cup-player-of-the-round-charlotte-gurr-150218 http://www.thefa.com/news/2018/mar/11/fa-womens-premier-league-wrap---110318 https://www.sportsvibe.co.uk/2018/02/17/osteopath150218-2-2/ https://www.kentlive.news/sport/football/football-news/former-arsenal-millwall-star-song-1130813
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: clearly meEts GNG looking at SportingFlyer's sources. Nomination is misleading - I noted that there was a LOT of media coverage; unfortunately the example I chose was poor. Given how much media coverage there is, and that they have played for years on top professional teams in the UK, that are not quite fully-professional ... this nomination is an example of  and should be withdrawn
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Systemic bias (WP:BIAS)

Comment: references above show enough coverage for , except ref 2, which is about a Charlotte Kerr (footballer)|different Charlotte. It would be harsh to fail this article on the basis of  as she has made several appearances for many top clubs on the women's side, even if they were not playing in FPLs at that exact time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NFOOTY)