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. with an option to userfy on request. MBisanz ^talk 21:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Swandi[edit]

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

User:Hildanknight contested the PROD as "this young footballer has received extensive coverage in the Singapore press". However, if that is true, then surely we would have more than 1 reference in the article. Point: The article still fails WP:GNG and certainly fails WP:NFOOTY. ArsenalFan700 (talk) 03:07, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still not sure what is meant by "quality" references. I would think coverage in electronic versions of print media is significant enough.Icedwater (talk) 05:59, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. He has not received significant coverage in reliable sources and has not played in a fully pro league, meaning the article fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - albeit somewhat reluctantly. I believe there are more references which can be added to prove he has received "significant" coverage. I have to ask User:Sir Sputnik, however, what would we consider to be "reliable" sources? Would websites of state-sanctioned print media count, or print references to specific issues of newspapers? Yet I cannot do it all myself and it seems no one else is willing to. Indeed, in the time elapsed between this article's creation and its flagging for deletion, I doubt there have been "significant" changes. I agree, however, that it fails WP:NFOOTY, because Adam Swandi has not yet played in a professional league at adult level. Since it precludes youth tournaments, even at the international level, I suggest we take this article down for the time being. Question: Is it possible to save this in some hidden corner so that when he begins his professional career, I don't have to trawl the web for old links? Icedwater (talk) 06:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Userfy or Incubate. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep The question is not how many references are currently in the article. The question is how many quality references are available but not in the article. --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 07:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy for the time being... Until he actually passes WP:NFOOTY. ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 08:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy per Bonkers the Clown. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 14:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Coverage is trivial at best. Giant Snowman 17:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete trivial mentions don't establish notability. SalHamton (talk) 22:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy until WP:GNG or WP:NFOOTY is met. Mentoz86 (talk) 04:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing more than passing references Spiderone 10:04, 11 April 2013 (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.