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 no consensus. This is quite a tricky close, yes initially a technical NFOOTY pass, but questionable GNG at best.
However, it seems that during the discussion consensus elsewhere regarding the
level of professionalism in the main league in which the player played decided that it was not fully professional.
There's an argument that this should be closed as delete as it now seems like both an NFOOTY and GNG failure. However, given the change of consensus midway through this AfD, I wonder whether some editors' comments may have been presented differently had the original rationale been fails NFOOTY, fails GNG. It seems preseumptive of a closing admin to assume they would have not.
In this instance it seems better, given that this discussion, and others, will probably shape a wider consensus, for this discussion to be closed as no consensus, but without this precluding a renomination with an updated rationale. This seems especially relevent given the majority of the keep votes were meets NFOOTY-based rather than attempting to present sources showing GNG.
Fenix down (
talk) 15:15, 25 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Our article says he played 21 WP:NFOOTY games in 2008 and 2010 in the third-tier semi professional, non-
WP:FPLUSL Second Division (
SW lists 4 games in 2010). Other than that, Apparently hasn't played in any
WP:FPLs and does not meet NFOOTY. Search results return no significant coverage to meet
WP:GNG. Levivich 17:23, 7 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Update: I have updated the nomination to reflect that this article no longer meets
WP:NFOOTY because
USL Second Division has been removed from
WP:FPL per the note below. Levivich 18:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Levivich 17:33, 7 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep – Clearly passes
WP:NFOOTY. As to the Soccerway discrepancy, the site doesn't have lineups for American leagues prior to ~2009; therefore, the 21 games is correct (see
the Riverhounds to back up the other 16 games), and that is much more than a marginal
WP:NFOOTY pass.
21.colinthompson (
talk) 22:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete. nom consulted me prior to nomination. Merits of NFOOTY here are somewhat dubious as while USL Division Two was nominally professional, many players were semi-professionals (holding additional jobs). This particular player retired after a short stint in order to become a golf caddie per his
LinkedIn (unfortunately - actual independent RSes don't exist). Regardless, NFOOTY merely creates a presumption of notability - a presumption that sources should exist. In this particular case - as evident in a very simple google search - there is no SIGCOV. As the presumption of GNG is being challenged here, !votes who assert NFOOTY without providing supporting sources (which should be quite easy to locate - English speaking country, most sources online in this time period) - should be disregarded.
Icewhiz (
talk) 06:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete no evidence that he passes GNG. That is the threhold, not the arbitrary trolling inclusion cretiera that has lead to half of all Wikipedia biographies being on footballers.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 04:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete: I don't care if he passes
WP:NFOOTY or not.
SNGs are subservient (with the exception of
PROF) to
GNG. They are meant to be a quick rule of thumb for probable notability. Passing them does not guarantee GNG passage. I do not see significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, therefore he's not notable. Simple as that. SITH(talk) 16:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Please see the comment by Icewhiz and updated rationale by Levivich. Further discussion may be needed as to whether he does indeed meet NFOOTY (and why), not to mention GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Black Kite (talk) 09:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep, clearly meets
WP:NFOOTY along with several other pages nominated by the same user.
Mosaicberry (
talk) 11:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)reply
delete Coverage of him doesn't meet the GNG and playing in the USL Second Division does not meet
WP:NFOOTY.
Sandals1 (
talk) 18:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete. It is not at all "clear" that the player meets NFOOTY, and there does not seem to be any coverage outside of comprehensive player databases.
Alpha3031 (
t •
c) 07:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
B dash (
talk) 08:18, 24 April 2019 (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.