- 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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:31, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Billy Dennis (Irish footballer) (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)
PROD contested with the following reason "I'm deeply disturbed that someone would take a 7-year old article about a long-term player, who appears to have been the leading scorer on his team during the pre-war era. Inconceivable that if one had access to the media of the time that meet WP:GNG)" - Fails WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:GNG.. non-notable player, who never played in a fully pro league. JMHamo (talk) 00:53, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 00:54, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Question Does anyone have any perspective on what the heck [1] is? I don't for one second suggest it's evidence of notability. If anything, I'm suspicious that something odd is up. Nfitz (talk) 01:28, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- ... and then this leads to [2] almost $100 with shipping and fees. Nfitz (talk) 01:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- It is a commercial venture that takes Wikipedia articles, prints them up, and sells them as "books" to suckers. The best known example is Books LLC. Of course, the value of such trash is zero for establishing notability. Maybe less than zero. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- That much is obvious. Is there more to it than though? That something has been done with Wiki material is one thing. Is there any indication that the material itself has been trumped up to allow this to be done? Nfitz (talk) 00:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I was working on the basis that the senior league of any sport in any country is entitled to have some articles. However, I do not claim to be a football expert. We are dealing with a relatively distnat period, and should not expect the criteria applicable to the presnet to be applied rigorously to periods when there was much less money about. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- While I very much agree with you, and think we spend far too much time deleting non-current historic players, who aren't easy to verify, I'm not sure this the hill to die on. It's hard to find much mention of him at all (let alone anything establishing notability), which is surprising, given the amount of books from that period that Google has digitized. There's likely a better case to be made for some of the many other Irish players currently up for deletion. Nfitz (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - article claims that Dennis also played for Port Vale, but this is not backed up by Michael Joyce's book "Football League Players' Records 1888 to 1939", so if he was ever on the club's books, he never played in the Football League, so no WP:NFOOTY pass there..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete While generally I believe that the articles of long-standing semi-professional Irish footballers with lots of media coverage should stand, I'm shocked at how little mention I can find of this particular player. While it's difficult to find articles relating to 2000s, 1990s, 1980s, etc. Irish players, because of a lack of availability of newspaper archives, a player from this far back should have at least some brief mention that would show up in a Google Book search, and I'm finding virtually squat. Whether this speaks to the unnotability of the player, the unnotabilty of Bohemians in the 1920s, the unnotability of football in Ireland in that period, or digitized Irish material for that period, I don't know. Coupled with the inaccuracy of the Port Vale information, and the bizarre con going on involving this player, and a lack of verification of much of the other information, then I'm not comfortable with this article being here. If someone can provide any independent documentation of this player's achievement, I'll happily remove my vote. Nfitz (talk) 13:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Player has not played in fully professional league, nor played senior international football, so fails NFOOTY. No indication of any other achievements garnering significant reliable coverage to achieve GNG. Fenix down (talk) 09:11, 24 March 2014 (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.