Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kjell Roar Kaasa

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. Total Keep Consensus. (non-admin closure) AmericanAir88^(talk) 19:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kjell Roar Kaasa

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Disputed PROD: "Eliteserien top scorer. Notability should be obvious" However it fails WP:NFOOTBALL because the article subject played at a time well before the Norwegian men's football league was 'fully professional'. Being top goal scorer in a part-time, semi-pro football league is not inherently notable and there is little evidence of enough sustained, non-routine coverage to come anywhere near WP:GNG. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Tippeligaen in the 1990s got massive attention in Norway's largest newspapers, try for example searching Norwegian Newspaper archives for "Kjetil Roar Kaasa" from 1990–2000, and you'll find 8600 hits.([1]) You can't simply disregard these players as "not professionals, thus not notable", and thinking of them as "part-time, semi-pro" gives a completely wrong impression. Deleting articles about such well known player makes little sense. Regards, Kjetil_r 21:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- A further example: Kaasa played in the European Cup Winners Cup 1998/1999 quarter-final.[2] You really can't think of players who spent the 1990s in the top Norwegian clubs as "part-timers", when these clubs made it into the group stage of the UEFA Champions League and the round of 16 of the Cup Winners cup. --Kjetil_r 22:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per level of coverage demonstrated by Kjetil_r. Giant Snowman 21:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I'm sure Kjetil_r can translate some of these but these sources certainly look like more than just name checks and routine reporting [3] [4] [5] [6] Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:05, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Bring back Daz Sampson PRODded this article first, suggesting to me that they either don't know the definition of 'uncontroversial' or couldn't be bothered to conduct WP:BEFORE because, as demonstrated by Kjetil_r and Spiderone, the subject of this article has received significant coverage. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 22:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per argument and sources provided by Kjetil_r. ser! (let's discuss it). 23:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a player with over 100 top-flight appearances. And, as stated above, there is easily enough coverage to pass GNG. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:10, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Kjetil_r and Spiderone. Who have provided sources to justify why this article should be on wikipedia. Govvy (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2021 (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.