Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Doe (3rd nomination): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:34, 4 August 2009

Scott Doe

Relist per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 July 30. Originally nominated for deletion by User:Vintagekits, who stated : Original reason for PROD removed. The footballer has never played in a fully-professional match. Fails WP:ATHLETE and the sources provided from the Dorset Echo are purely trivial. I barely consider the 3rd level of English football notable - this guy played in the 6th! Hiding T 21:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC) Hiding T 21:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest ever delete, Primarily because this guy is plays in the 6th level of English football and although there are multiple sources provided they are of a trivial routine nature and mentions provide nothing indepth to show notability, WP:NTEMP outlines that "routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for a topic to have its own standalone article".--Vintagekits (talk) 21:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete many of the references are trivial and the subject fails WP:ATHLETE Valenciano (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep sources Great Scott, Great Scott is one for future and Scott signs up are in detail passing significant independent coverage part of WP:GNG, which supercedes WP:ATHLETE. Nom is factually incorrect, he has never played below the Conference National, which is the 5th tier in English football. --Jimbo^[online] 22:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable, well sourced. Jeni ^(talk) 23:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note. Anybody voting based on WP:ATHLETE needs to realise that League 2 actually begins on 8 Aug. MickMacNee (talk) 23:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- Meets regular notability requirements. WP:ATHLETE would be nice, but its not required. Umbralcorax (talk) 02:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well sourced article, notablity established. 69.253.207.9 (talk) 02:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. --Jimbo^[online] 02:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:ATHLETE and all coverage I can find is either trivial or local. Them From Space 04:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The player does not meet the WP:ATHLETE guideline because the highest level he has played in so far is the 5th level (not the 6th level as stated by the nominator) Conference National, which is a mixture of fully professional and semi-professional clubs. In this respect it is similar to the League of Ireland, player articles from which the nominator has been admirably trying to defend at every quarter. The sources provided clearly verify the player's status and achievements, and arguably satisfy WP:N. He has been reported in national outlets like The Times, BBC Sport and Sky Sports. In any case, and I know this is crystalballing, he is now signed on a two year contract by a club in the 4th level Football League Two, and will therefore likely meet the WP:ATHLETE guideline soon as well. My attitude towards this is similar to well sourced articles about Irish players. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 05:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Why can't this be recreated when he makes a League Two appearance? It'd be embarrassing if he doesn't make an appearance this season and his article stays. Spiderone (talk) 08:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - yes he fails WP:ATHLETE, but he also quite clearly passes the parent guideline of WP:GNG. Giant Snowman 08:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 *'''Weak keep'''. The player does not meet the [[WP:ATHLETE]] guideline because the highest level he has played in so far is the 5th level (''not'' the 6th level as stated by the nominator) Conference National, which is a mixture of fully professional and semi-professional clubs. In this respect it is similar to the League of Ireland, player articles from which the nominator has been admirably trying to defend at every quarter. The sources provided clearly [[WP:V|verify]] the player's status and achievements, and arguably satisfy [[WP:N]]. He has been reported in national outlets like ''The Times'', BBC Sport and Sky Sports. In any case, and I know this is [[WP:CRYSTALBALL|crystalballing]], he is now signed on a two year contract by a club in the 4th level Football League Two, and will therefore likely meet the [[WP:ATHLETE]] guideline soon as well. My attitude towards this is similar to ''well sourced'' articles about Irish players. [[User:Jmorrison230582|Jmorrison230582]] ([[User talk:Jmorrison230582|talk]]) 05:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' Why can't this be recreated when he makes a League Two appearance? It'd be embarrassing if he doesn't make an appearance this season and his article stays. [[User:Spiderone|Spiderone]] ([[User talk:Spiderone|talk]]) 08:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' - yes he fails [[WP:ATHLETE]], but he also quite clearly passes the parent guideline of [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 08:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)