Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milan Vukašinović

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 Keep (non-admin closure). Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Milan Vukašinović

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

Article's subject fails to meet WP:GNG. A search on GoogleNews produces no hits, a regular Google search shows pages of statistics but no substantive coverage. I have verified that there are no articles on him in either the Serbian or Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias. While he may appear to meet WP:NSPORT, he does not meet the the more-fundamental requirements of WP:GNG. KDS4444^Talk 09:12, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - numerous appearances in a fully-professional league, as confirmed by reliable sources, so this player meets WP:NFOOTBALL. Needs improving, not deleting, to bring in line with WP:GNG. Nomination smacks of WP:POINT. Giant Snowman 17:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appears to meet WP:NFOOTBALL.[1] Mice never shop (talk) 00:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Vukašinović was his club's leading scorer in a fully-pro league and has played several seasons at that level. I've slightly expanded the article based on a brief mention in a Danas article, and I think it should easily pass GNG with some help from someone more capable with the Serbian language. This article needs some work, but that's not a good reason to delete. Jogurney (talk) 19:50, 4 July 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.