Deletion of Mickey Renaud (2nd nomination)

Comment: But he wasn't notable in his life is the argument. He fell to afd just 3 months ago for that reason. Now he is back with an article after he has died. Wikipedia:N#TEMP|Notability is not temporary comes into play because he is only notable because of a short burst of news coverage. As far as "was going to the majors" well that just reeks of rystal|wikipedia is not a crystal ball, players drafted that low in the draft rarely go to the majors and since he never actually did go there you can't make assumptions that he would have. Being a captain of a junior team still does not make one notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C)

Comment: Tragic that he passed away. Nevertheless, he is not notable per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: See my comments above, the fact he was going to the majors is your guess, he didn't do it yet so that is a case of rystal. Players drafted that low rarely make the majors so it is not a given fact that he was going to be going to the big show. And being a captain of junior team still does not make you notable as junior teams have many captains over the years, its not like being the captain of an NHL team which might last for 10 years or however long
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP:C)

Comment: and close per no consensus. A presumption of notability, according to the guideline, is derived from sources. I would take that a bit further and state it also implies that a person should really be notable for more than just one accomplishment. This player had a storied collegiate and amateur career, and an unfortunate death, so we can close that portion of the discussion. The first sentence of the guideline is that "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The subject meets these criteria. Anything to circumvent  defeats having it in the first place. Further, per , "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability." There are multiple independent secondary sources so this requirement is also met. These are the only requirements that afford a presumption of notability. Past this, we have only Additional criteria, such as , and "Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:BIO||WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: with additional sources now added, it now meets 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: I agree, they should. But just because |there are other things needing fixing doesn't mean this shouldn't be deleted
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)