Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikola Saric
Saric doesn't pass thlete, but I think the coverage of him meets the general otability guidelines, namely "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."  On a national/international scalehttp://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/26062008/58/premier-league-liverpool-set-sign-dane.html Yahoo! Sport, http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/article1351530.ece The Sun, and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/sport/2008/06/27/ufnliverpool127.xml The Telegraph all had articles that were primarily or exclusively about him, in addition to plenty of coverage in large local papers such as http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2008/06/27/rafa-benitez-to-seal-double-capture-of-nikola-saric-and-andrea-dossena-64375-21159607/ The Liverpool Daily Post.  In full consideration of  and the fact that he hasn't played for Liverpool yet, national papers running stories in which you are the centerpiece counts as notable for me
— User:Vickser, 21:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:A||WP:N||WP:CRYSTALBALL (Wikipedia:Attribution)