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. NFOOTY presumes that GNG is met when a player makes appearances at a certain level. This has been challenged here and nothing has been provided to indicate sufficient significant independent coverage exists to satisfy GNG. Ultimately this is a player who played a very few games at a fully professional level and has since, at best drifted into lower leagues or at worst has stopped playing at all. Perhaps he will enjoy a resurgence in his career. If so, the article can always be restored. Fenix down (talk) 22:36, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abdoulaye Sanogo[edit]

Abdoulaye Sanogo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article about footballer who made 2 substitute's appearances (<10 minutes of total play) for Eupen in the fully-pro Belgian top division, plus 1 substitute's appearance (<20 minutes of play) in the Belgian UEFA Europa League play-offs, during the 2016–17 season. The only online coverage of this player is routine (e.g., match reports, transfer announcements, or statistical database entries). There is nothing discussing his career (to the extent it might have continued) in the past 18 months following a brief article noting that he was one of 19 players out of contract at Eupen after the 2016–17 season ended. Prior consensus (e.g., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phakamani Mngadi) is that a nominal amount of play in a fully-pro league doesn't meet WP:NFOOTBALL when an article comprehensively fails WP:GNG - as is the case here. Jogurney (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:31, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - 20 first team appearances = sufficient. GiantSnowman 10:25, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @GiantSnowman: not the case here - see - [1][2][3]. It would seem he made 3 senior appearances in 2016/7 - coming in a as a sub - with a total playing time of 27 minutes. The rest of his appearances appear to be in the in FDB (in 2015/6 and in 2014/5 - 7 games in each season (263 minutes and 184 minutes - so quite a bit subbing in relation to 630 minutes off regulation time in 7 games)) - which per Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues were not NFOOTY eligible (this became NFOOTY eligible in 2016/7). A substitute player in a club that won promotion - who then faded away to some unknown location.Icewhiz (talk) 12:23, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  He passes WP:NFOOTBALL by virtue of his appearances in a WP:FPL (4 in 2016–17 season per Soccerway, including Cup games, actually totalling 44 minutes), and given his other appearances in lower leagues this is not a simple case of 'only made 1 carer appearance, should be deleted'. GiantSnowman 12:28, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  If we're going to apply NFOOTBALL, let's apply it properly. His substitute's appearance in the Cup match was against 5th-tier amateurs S.K. Berlare (which doesn't count under NFOOTBALL). So his sum total of fully-pro league matches is '3' and the total minutes played is '27' - that's barely scraping over the line. Jogurney (talk) 14:30, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. NFOOTY merely creates a presumption that GNG is met, however in this case this player who barely meets NFOOTY (around 27 minutes of NFOOTY play + maybe a few more minutes in domestic cup play), clearly does not pass GNG - it is actually quite hard to find sources on this Sanogo - there is a more notable individual with the same name (but clearly different - per age) - who was allegdly involved for 30 years in illicit protected species trading.[4][5] As the subject fails GNG, it should be deleted.Icewhiz (talk) 12:26, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Passes WP:NFOOTY having made several appearances in a fully professional league. As GiantSnowman pointed out, this is not a case of a player making one appearance and never playing again, Sanogo spent three seasons with the club and made 20 appearances. On a side note, there appears to be plenty of mentions of Sanogo in terms of his time with the Aspire Academy online. I would suspect Malian or Qatari based sources may provide more in-depth coverage. Kosack (talk) 12:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a clear failure of GNG, which is not trumped by football notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - The article clearly passes WP:NFOOTY. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:26, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I don't care if he passes WP:NSPORT because, per that very guideline, Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb... In other words, GNG still applies. SITH (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2019 (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.