Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Júnior Padilla

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 22:13, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Júnior Padilla

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:01, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following article for the same reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep ~~Delete~~ - both articles per WP:NFOOTBALL - The Honduran Liga Nacional is not listed as a fully professional league. Both players have not played in senior international matches. No other reasons are mentioned in the articles why the subjects are relevant. -- Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 19:09, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing to keep. Pharaoh provides a link below to a senior international match Padilla had played in. Also, I believe the second article should be posted seperately since it does not get enough attention like this and it gets very confusing. - Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 19:52, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both - fail WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 19:13, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - He hasn't played in a Fully professional league and he doesn't have any senior international caps either therefore he fails WP:NFOOTBALL. IJA (talk) 10:33, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:GNG with [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Nfitz (talk) 17:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NFOOTY as has not played senior international football nor played in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Nfitz points to a number of articles dealing with the players, but bar one interview, the remainder are very brief notes of no more than a few paragraphs. Not really seeing anything substantial. Fenix down (talk) 11:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per Nfitz and further has played in the CONCACAF Champions League the regional equivalent of the UEFA Champions League in 2011–12 CONCACAF Champions League Group Stage for Motagua as per this.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:36, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, postdlf (talk) 17:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional de Honduras would appear (by its name) to be a professional league. Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues needs to be updated and not this article deleted. Op47 (talk) 12:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The name of a league does not necessarily reflect reality. Just as an example, the fourth division of French football is semi-pro despite being called Championnat de France amateur. Without reliable sources confirming that the Liga Nacional is in fact fully pro, the claim that it is carries no weight. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Given the claim in the name that it is professional then I would suppose the league to be professional unless proof otherwise could be shown. Above, fully professional league was quoted as evidence despite the list itself stating that it is incomplete. Anyway, all of this is moot because, putting the league's article title into google revealed a claim that the league is in fact professional. I admit it is the leagues own website and it is in Spanish (I think), but it clearly states that the league is professional. So the objection that this person has not played in a professional football league no longer stands, unless you can show evidence to the contrary. Op47 (talk) 19:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of issues with this. First, the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and by extension on the editor wishing to show notability via the criteria of WP:NFOOTY as a matter of textual interpretation, regardless of the particular naming conventions of any league. The name of a league is essentially treated as an unreliable source. The incompleteness of WP:FPL is not relevant for these same reasons. It does not matter whether the absence of a league from the list is due to an absence of professionalism or an absence of sources; both are required to demonstrate notability under WP:NFOOTY. The other issue is that unqualified the word professional to describe a league is not sufficiently precise to demonstrate that WP:NFOOTY is met, as the guideline requires that a footballer have played in a fully professional league (emphasis mine). While there is no doubt that the there is some degree of professionalism in the Liga Nacional, there is nothing to indicate that the league is in fact fully professional. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:52, 26 October 2014 (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.