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. -- Cirt (talk) 11:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Clapham[edit]

Aaron Clapham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Declined prod. This guy has never played at a fully pro level: the New Zealand Football Championship is not fully professional. Nor is the Victorian Premier League. Fails WP:ATH. Mkativerata (talk) 07:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Mkativerata (talk) 07:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. -- Mkativerata (talk) 07:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- Mkativerata (talk) 07:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- Mkativerata (talk) 07:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I removed the prod because I'd expected that the highest-level football league in a country would be fully professional. Question — if the country has no fully professional league of its own, wouldn't this guy qualify under the amateur side of WP:ATHLETE, since he's competed at the highest level possible? Nyttend (talk) 23:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In my view, the highest amateur level in football is the Olympics. In any case, given that football is such a highly professionalised sport (40,000 pros worldwide if I recall), it makes little sense to me to allow local amateur athletes to get through WP:ATH as well. Not arguing with your prod decline by the way - obviously a safe course given your concerns. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:50, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The idea that playing in top league of a country despite being amateur is enough to pass ATHLETE has been argued many times before... it would make every Cook Island, Tonga, Bhutan etc first div player that ever played eligible as WP:ATHLETEs. --ClubOranje^T 05:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not arguing; I was just asking, since I wasn't sure. I deal very little with culture-related topics on Wikipedia; I only encountered this one because I was deleting expired PRODs, and I don't think it a good idea always to delete an expired PROD without considering the merits of the reasoning. Thanks for the argument about the people from the less significant nations. Nyttend (talk) 13:12, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails ATHLETE, not played professionally, nor has he played at top level amateur - normally taken to mean Olympics or world championships. It is accepted practice to include full national appearances for football, but Clapham has only played at age-group level. Also, it is not his highest possible level as he could play for Wellington Phoenix or any of a number of other professional clubs in Australia and the US where he has actually played Amateur football. Some mentions out there, but all seems to be name drops in match reports and routine sports journalism or club profiles, which don't amount to WP:GNG. Recreate if and when--ClubOranje^T 05:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:ATHLETE. A-League is the top professional league in Australia/NZ. LibStar (talk) 14:43, 4 April 2010 (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.