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 no consensus. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 13:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Thompson[edit]

Adam Thompson (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)

Created by someone who really should know our criteria better. (struck... case of the two bobs) Subject does not pass the WP:GNG, and does not EVEN meet WP:NFOOTBALL, which sets a pathetically low bar. --WFC-- 16:50, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - What is the 'case of the two bobs'?--EchetusXe 10:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken identity. --WFC-- 00:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Hasn't yet played a fully-professional game and calls up to any national team below the full team don't grant notability. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 21:45, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - He has played a fully professional game. The League Cup is a competition for teams of the Football League, all of which are fully professional clubs.--EchetusXe 10:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That doesn't meet the letter of ATHLETE, nor does it meet the supposed spirit (which is to provide guidance on when an individual meets the GNG). For the uninitiated, clubs routinely field weakened teams in this competition. For instance, Manchester United rested 11 players from their previous league match against Liverpool when they played Scunthorpe, and Sir Alex Ferguson missed the match to go scouting. [1] That is indisputedly an extreme case, but there is a good reason that we only consider league appearances; at least it can be argued that 95+% of the time teams are trying to field their strongest possible team in a league match. Regardless, there is an expectation that the subject demonstrates general notability. Otherwise, we are merely spending this charity's money on a duplicate copy of information that is going to be written about in the context of what they are actually notable for. --WFC-- 08:54, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 12:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep has played in a fully-pro competition, so meets WP:ATHLETE. GiantSnowman 12:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • He does not meet "WP:ATHLETE", as he has not played in a fully professional league. As low a bar as WP:ATHLETE sets for association footballers, the wording is quite explicit. Players have to have played in a fully professional league. --WFC-- 00:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • He has played in a fully-professional competition, and therefore does meet ATHLETE. The wording is not explicit; read the intro to ATHLETE, which states "This page documents an English Wikipedia notability guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense." If you are seriously arguing that there is a difference between playing in a fully-pro league and playing in a fully-pro competition with regards to notability then you should heed those words. GiantSnowman 14:44, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • It also says "This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sportsperson, sports league, or an amateur/professional sports league organization will meet the general notability guideline." If you believe that playing in the league cup against lower league opposition because the manager doesn't want to pick more established options meets the WP:GNG, then you are either acting in good faith but failing to heed the very words you quote, or taking the letter instead of the spirit in a desperate bid to defend football's near-exclusive right to have non-notable biographies. --WFC-- 22:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - has now passed the WP:NSPORTS#Association football bar. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is factually incorrect, as noted above. --WFC-- 00:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete lack of coverage in reliable sources: notability not established regardless of fotball game. Sandman888 (talk) 19:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -precedent seems to have been set long ago for an appearance in the FA/League Cup or even the Football League trophy to make a player notable when appearing for a fully pro team. If the consensus is otherwise I can point you in the direction of many, maybe dozens, of articles which need deleting!--Egghead06 (talk) 07:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Precedent has long been established that rules of thumb are descriptive, not prescriptive. Articles must demonstrate notability. Meeting an arbitrary measure such as one (or two, or ten) professional appearances is an indication that on the balance of probability a subject is notable, not an indication a demonstration of notability in its own right. As an aside, the fact that there are other articles out there is not a good reason for keeping a non-notable article. --WFC-- 00:23, 25 September 2010 (UTC) (corrected at 00:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC))[reply]
  • Cannot believe that, as stated above, spending this charity's money, by debating/deleting/reinstating etc each one of these articles on a piecemeal basis is a good use of resources. Demonstrating notabilty is very much a subjective thing. One person's notability is anothers trivia. Surely all that's needed is a set of non-wooly rules for footballer notability. Played for a pro team or international level/in these leagues(level 1-?). Too simply or do we really like the way it is?--Egghead06 (talk) 07:45, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The creator is entirely at fault for this discussion taking place, given that he knew full well that this would happen. In answer to your question, football editors (on the whole) like the de-facto status quo, because it makes it extremely difficult to actually force the subject of an article to prove it is remotely notable. They enjoy having a notability bar that is completely out of step with every other biography on the site. And from my experience, they will violently defend the letter of WP:NFOOTBALL (1 professional league appearance = eternal notability) over the spirit (a good faith attempt to provide a rule of thumb that will reduce the need for discussions of this sort). If we are going to use NFOOTBALL as a hard-and-fast rule, it should be set at a level where nigh-on 100% of people that meet the criteria will pass the GNG, rather than the current situation, where the majority of people that narrowly meet the criteria fail the GNG.
    • But in the context of this AfD, my answer to your question is irrelevant. Why? Because this guy does not even meet that criteria! --WFC-- 08:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Sandman and Jess. I'm sorry, Adam. ᴳᴿᴲᴳᴼᴿᴵᴷ☺ᶤᶯᵈᶸᶩᶢᵉ 11:38, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Watford is one of those teams that floats between top league and the second league. Plus this guy has been called up for a national team, the U-17, which plays competitively in FIFA tournaments. Considering these things, I'd leave the article in existence. Sven Manguard _Talk 03:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The league detail is irrelevant, given that he hasn't played in the league. And we've already got acknowledgement of his international participation on Wikipedia. While worthy of a mention somewhere, youth caps do not justify full-blown articles. --WFC-- 03:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I also think he's being a bit generous referring to Watford as "float[ing] between top league and the second league", given that they've only spent two seasons in the top league since 1988...... ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • The supporter of a team one league above Luton makes a good point :-( --WFC-- 09:41, 28 September 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.