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. Consensus is that GNG is met, outside of NFOOTY. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Pengelly[edit]

[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)

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:ANYBIO the sources are run of the mill match reports interviews and affiliated. There is no in-depth coverage and nothing of interest found in a before search. Myfootball.com is affiliated as it is the federation's web page, Brisbane strikers is affiliated, FFA site is affiliated and also a match report, SBS is an WP:INTERVIEW and also a streaming service but I am not sure if they stream NPLQ matchs. highly unlikely that a semi-pro player for a semi pro club playing in a state level league will generate enough interest to meet WP:GNG Dom from Paris (talk) 13:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY Seasider91 (talk) 18:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Fails WP:NFOOTY but may scrape through WP:GNG has been in the news for his scoring [1] [2] [3][4][5].Have added references. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the sources and they are all very local and not enough for me to change my mind about this nomination. This is symptomatic of the state of Wikipedia today is becoming a repository for sports stats and bios on local sports personalities that if we took a step back from GNG common sense would tell us that they are not ready for a place in an international encyclopedia. --Dom from Paris (talk) 09:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - probably scapes through on GNG. Giant Snowman 09:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person passes WP:GNG per Pharaoh of the Wizards found references. Wm335td (talk) 21:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete he fails WP:NFOOTY and all of the WP:GNG sources are very local. Hopefully he gets a professional call up but I think it's a bit WP:TOOSOON. SportingFlyer T·C 03:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - just passes GNG with Pharoah of the Wizards' references. Bookscale (talk) 09:32, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree he passes WP:GNG , Alex-h (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly fails notability gudelines for footballers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:38, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meeting WP:GNG is enough to justify inclusion. Local coverage is not a problem as long as coverage is not trivial clearly independent and from multiple sources. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 09:48, 25 August 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.