Talk:Aaron Cornelius
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Removal of prod edit
Player is senior listed and eligible to play immediately in the 2009 premiership season. I am mindful of the fact that AFL squads are fairly sizable however I'd suggest all senior listed players are of equal notability. Surely players such as Nicholas Naitanui, taken in the same draft as Cornelius are of substantial notability. AFL recruitment is a highly publicised activity and Naitanui had long been identified as an early draft pick, several years in advance. Regardless of this, once players are drafted they are relatively equal... i.e they are now senior listed AFL players eligible to play senior football immediately. Where does one draw the line? Cornelius for example drew considerable attention as an underage player ineligible for the draft in 2007. The Champion Data prospectus for 2008 identified him as a potential top 25 selection, does the fact that he slid down the draft ladder make him immediately less notable?
I'd suggest all senior listed players are of substantial notability. Rookie listed players however should perhaps be considered lacking in notability until they are elevated to a senior list.
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Aaron Cornelius. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081206072622/http://news.theage.com.au/sport/lions-hit-draft-jackpot-by-getting-rich-20081129-6nd4.html to http://news.theage.com.au/sport/lions-hit-draft-jackpot-by-getting-rich-20081129-6nd4.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081208012247/http://lions.com.au/News/NewsArticle/tabid/5085/Default.aspx?newsId=70612 to http://www.lions.com.au/News/NewsArticle/tabid/5085/Default.aspx?newsId=70612
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:45, 24 June 2017 (UTC)