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. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 12:23, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Football player, only played 11 matches, 7 as a substitute after playing for 7 years. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Never took off. scope_creep (talk) 09:48, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete has never played in a fully professional league.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL as above. Needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 08:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Where exactly is he mentioned on the page: this. A simple search on first, last, first + last names, doesn't turn up anything. So far there is assertions, but no evidence. User:GiantSnowman where is your evidence? WP:BADNAC is a good policy. scope_creep (talk) 12:29, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - that is literally his Soccerway profile, it's entirely about him, what on earth do you mean "where exactly he is mentioned"?! Just because the spelling is slightly different is irrelevant. Transliteration from Arabic is notoriously complex. GiantSnowman 12:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is a sop. Where is the evidence. His Soccerway profile shows he played 11 games, 7 as a sub. He is non starter and the profile doesn't show any evidence that that he satisfies WP:NFOOTBALL. scope_creep (talk) 13:16, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes NFOOTY, has played senior international football, in a fully professional league or in a match in the competition proper (i.e. not qualifying rounds) of a cup competition which involved two teams both from FPLs. Fenix down (talk) 11:24, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Fenix down:, are you really claiming he has played senior international football? I can find zero evidence of this. ClubOranjeT 08:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You need to reread my comment I think. Fenix down (talk) 10:22, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've reread it. You clearly state "has played senior international football". ClubOranjeT 11:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NFOOTY. Please refrain from attacking BLP as "non starter" and "never took off". gidonb (talk) 12:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He does technically meet WP:NFOOTBALL, but that only asserts a "presumption" of notability. With only 21 minutes in a single fully professional league game according to his profile I'd want to see a bit of coverage somewhere. Note the Crown Prince Cup games were against lower league sides, I can't even find a reliable source with his DOB. Even the Arabic pages seem to only have vague stats and no in depth about him. As stated in WP:NSPORTS and WP:N, all standalone articles are required to meet the General Notability Guideline. NFOOTBALL is only to provide bright-line guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to meet the General Notability Guideline. With more FPL time or international appearance I'd accept that likelihood, but this subject fails WP:GNG. ClubOranjeT 11:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NFOOTBALL, which, contrary to some editors' beliefs, has as much worth as WP:GNG in deciding the notability of football biographies. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:35, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
comment not according to this discussion which determined there was a strong consensus that the GNG is the controlling guideline, while the criteria at NSPORT are useful tools to try to quickly determine the likelihood of an article meeting the GNG. and concluded There is clear consensus that no subject-specific notability guideline, including Notability (sports) is a replacement for or supercedes the General Notability Guideline.ClubOranjeT 10:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Another football fan. What is the ethics around a football fan or fans voting in a Afd for a football or sports related article in WP? Is it always an automatic keep, all the time? WP:NFOOTY is a lower standard of notability than WP:GNG, and it always has been from the getgo. Fails WP:GNG. scope_creep (talk) 14:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you care to take a look at other football related AFDs, you might find it isn't "always an automatic keep, all the time". Why do I sense condescension in your tone? Mattythewhite (talk) 14:29, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NFOOTY by playing in a fully professional league. Seems pretty clear cut to me. Smartyllama (talk) 20:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteWeak keep - Although this article is about a footballer who highest achievement is 21 minutes a handful of matches of play in a fully-pro league (detailed by the Splstats profile in Arabic), and there is nothing online (as ClubOranje notes above) to suggest the article could ever be GNG-compliant, we generally assume that offline sources exist (particularly in a region with limited internet sources such as Saudi Arabia).and we have an established consensus to !Delete articles like this when a footballer so minimally crosses the threshold in NFOOTY. There is no good reason to believe the subject of this article is notable.Jogurney (talk) 21:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment None of the sports fans voting automatic keep above have taken general disclosure under WP:COI. Specifically WP:COI states:
Editors with a COI cannot know whether or how much it has influenced their editing..
All the soccer fans here have a clear conflict of interest and such should recuse themselves, or undertake WP:COI, and list your conflicts of interests and affiliations to closing admin. scope_creep (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:COI defines conflict of interest as "contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships". Where has any of that occurred in this AfD? Mattythewhite (talk) 00:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Scope creep:, Football fans monitor football AfDs , cycling fans monitor cycling AfDs, Politics followers monitor politics AfDs. It is the way it is, people largely comment on what they know about. That doesn't make it a COI. I have a football interest, but don't plan on declaring that at every AFD. ClubOranjeT 08:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I figured that. Perhaps, and end up with talking heads not having a scobie what they are talking about. I take the point. Sorry for mentioning it. It was crass. But, even though it has been pointed out that WP:GNG is a higher standard of notability than WP:NFOOTY, that the player has only played 21mins and been a sub 7 times in 11 matches over 7 years and I still can't determine if he played in the fully professional league and there is zero coverage of the player anywhere, outside the Soccerway profile, they still want a keep it. scope_creep (talk) 09:32, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - there seems to be some confusion as to what the sources in the article are saying, presumably as a result of them being written in Arabic. However, google transalte is able to present perfectly reasonable translations which show that he has played at least 15 matches in fully professional leagues, not the 21 mins noted by several editors above. Fenix down (talk) 10:31, 22 September 2017 (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.