Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitch Haniger
Solid !vote for keeping this article based on significant coverage of the subject in multiple, independent, reliable sources per the general notability guidelines of .  I would like to compliment Muboshgu: that's what ''significant coverage'' is supposed to look like in a GNG discussion.  Several solid feature articles about the subject in mainstream news and sports publications -- not stats sites, not recruiting sites, not draft prospects sites, not random one and two-sentence mentions, not  post-game coverage that mentions the subject's game performance or even quotes the subject, not obscure minor league sports sites.  I would also like to endorse the comments of Cbl62 above: GNG is an ''objective standard'' based on the quality and depth of media coverage, not based on the MLB prospects of the athlete.  If significant coverage is there, the subject is notable for Wikipedia purposes.  If the coverage is marginal, other factors including common sense can (and arguably should) come into play
— User:Dirtlawyer1, 01:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:ROUTINE (Wikipedia:Notability)