Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Diebert

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:54, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chuck Diebert

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This chess player and chess coach is not notable enough, nor for his achievements in playing chess, neither for his achievements in coaching other chess players. SyG (talk) 16:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 16:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Also not notable as a chess author, the other possible reason for an article. Quale (talk) 18:52, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - concur with notability concerns.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This guy is nowhere near notable enough. If the criteria for playing caliber is at least GM, then this guy is several leagues too low. Not only has he never obtained the IM title, he has never even had an FM title (2300+ FIDE), or even been a national senior master! (2400+ USCF) His coaching is also not any more extensive or successful than countless other chess teachers across the country. ChessPlayerLev (talk) 04:10, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No obvious notability. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.