Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tatsunari Nagai

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 delete. So Why 17:44, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tatsunari Nagai

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

Recreation of an article previously deleted by PROD. Concern was It does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Association football. This remains valid. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:43, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - Fail NFOOTY as have not played or managed senior international football nor played or managed in a fully professional league. No indication that subjects have garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - keep Anzai and Taguchi per the comments below, my rationale above still stands for the remainder. Fenix down (talk) 12:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why there's a proposition to delete this page. They're all now playing fully pro-football in J3 League. And for Iwadate is even more un-necessary, since he has been in pro-football for a lot of time (since 2012).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Whispered11 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 09 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Anzai at least has played in two matches this season for top-tier J1 Kashiwa, including starting on May 3, so at least he better fits WP:NFOOTY.[1]. Michitaro (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw Anzai and Taguchi. I misread the sources for these two as I expected them to match what is written in the article. Turns out these two have J1 League appearances not mentioned in the article. @Fenix down: You might want to re-evaluate your !vote. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:33, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 08:24, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If Anzac and Taguchi are to be withdrawn as they pass criteria, would someone like to actually update their articles to indicate this please. I would but Japanese is not a language I can read. ? @Michitaro: maybe? ClubOranje^T 03:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As it stands despite the fact that certain players meet the WP:NFOOTY criteria they all fail WP:GNG and the subject specific criteria are simply a pointer towards notability. In the FAQ of WP:NSPORT it states

Q2:If a sports figure meets the criteria specified in a sports-specific notability guideline, does this mean he/she does not have to meet the general notability guideline?
A2: No, the subject must still eventually meet the general notability guideline. Although the criteria for a given sport should be chosen to be a very reliable predictor of the availability of appropriate secondary coverage from reliable sources, there can be exceptions. For contemporary persons, given a reasonable amount of time to locate appropriate sources, the general notability guideline should be met in order for an article to meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. (For subjects in the past where it is more difficult to locate sources, it may be necessary to evaluate the subject's likely notability based on other persons of the same time period with similar characteristics.)

Now that notability has been questioned the necessary sources must be added to prove that they pass WP:GNG. A reasonable amount of time may be allowed but seeing that they are contemporary subjects this should be very quick and should really already have been done at the creation of the article. Domdeparis (talk) 12:13, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the remaining two as failing WP:NFOOTY. Just a reminder to Domdeparis that the RfC specifically instructed not to create indiscriminate AfD of articles that pass the WP:NSPORT guidelines. That being said, the remaining two that haven't been withdrawn do not pass the guidelines and as such this nomination is not indiscriminate. Smartyllama (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smartyllama: sorry I have no idea what you are talking about. What RFC? I arrived here as a new pages reviewer and not through a RFC. And an article that doesn't pass GNG and is nominated for deletion is not indiscriminate. Domdeparis (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2017 (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.