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. لennavecia 16:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colin Ramirez[edit]

Colin Ramirez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Contested WP:PROD about a Gibraltarian footballer who fails WP:ATHLETE, as having never played in levels higher than Segunda División B with UD Linense, and Northern Ireland league with Glentoran, none of them being professional. International appearances with Gibraltar team are irrelevant, due to the team not being internationally recognized. Angelo (talk) 08:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. – PeeJay 08:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Glentoran are in the highest level of Northern Irish football so he passes WP:ATHLETE. 173.103.216.125 (talk) 09:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment WP:ATHLETE states he has to play in a "fully-professional level", rather than the highest level in a country's league system. --Jimbo^[online] 10:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Not sure where exactly this should be discussed but the "fully-professional" criterion is so vague as to be largely useless. Which countries top-flights are fully professional? It's impossible to give an objective answer to that question. While reading the pages for deletion I see that the US baseball pages are an absolute mess right now with no clear distinction whether the US minor leagues, where players often receive higher than the median US salary, are considered "fully-professional" and it seems completely arbitrary which pages are nominated for deletion. All of these issues need to be discussed. 70.4.195.39 (talk) 21:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment for football, Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues is a good place to check for league statuses. Nanonic (talk) 13:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • The list is a bit of a joke really due to lack of sources. The 'athlete' criteria can't really be proved so is almost useless. Eldumpo (talk) 18:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Feel free to come up with something better. Nanonic (talk) 19:05, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I would say it's impossible to do so given the definition of professional league! Eldumpo (talk) 22:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • The definition of fully professional league is made by the type of contract players receive. For instance, in Italy all clubs up from fourth tier have to sign players as full-time professional workers with a minimum guaranteed salary of 1,800 € per month (I am unsure about the amount, it might have changed recently). Your opinion on the athlete criteria is, actually, just an opinion of yours; we've had plenty of AfDs like these where WP:ATHLETE was widely used as a fundamental rule of thumb, if you disagree with it, well, sorry but this is the wrong place to discuss it. --Angelo (talk) 23:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Actually in my experience WP:ATHLETE is completely arbitary, see the above comments about US minor league baseball players. They are full-time professional workers and many of them receive minimum guaranteed salaries in that range, yet many people argue that US minor league baseball players are not fully professional. How can an Italian 4th tier player be fully professional yet a US 4th tier baseball player not be when they are both under full time contracts? It makes no sense. 70.4.168.108 (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • First, what is your experience? This is your first Wikipedia edit, with all the possible respect I don't see evidence of such "experience". Secondly, I don't know anything about baseball, including the basic game rules, so I am not going to make any claims regarding it; if you can provide sources to support your claims, provide them at WP:BIO's talkpage. This is definitely not the right place to discuss the matter. --Angelo (talk) 06:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 11:38, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom; non-notable player. GiantSnowman 11:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep if he's played in the Northern Irish League he should be kept as is a notable league. Eldumpo (talk) 22:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Actually I even failed to find evidence of actual appearances in the Northern Irish league for this subject. I managed to find a couple citations regarding his appointment with the club back in January 1996, but no evidence of games where he actually was featured. --Angelo (talk) 23:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - even without considering whether or not playing in the N. Irish league would pass muster, as Angelo points out above no sources have been yet found to confirm that he ever actually played for said club's first team -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. He has only competed at in semi-professional leagues and therefore fails WP:ATHLETE, and there's nothing else to suggest he's notable in any other way. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 13:53, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails criteria at WP:N, WP:V and WP:ATH. --Jimbo^[online] 22:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep FYI multiple keep votes have been deleted from this page, check the revision history. Deletion discussions should not be altered. 174.152.146.29 (talk) 08:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's not true, I checked the revision history and no keep !votes have been deleted at all. Do you have a policy-based reason why the article should be kept -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment This isn't even a vote, it's a discussion, but there are multiple comments that have been deleted as "personal attacks" simply because they disagree with an admin who has a long history of telling people what they can and cannot revise as if he owns the pages in question. 99.202.15.61 (talk) 06:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:ATHLETE - even if he had played for Glentoran, he still wouldn't pass it because the Northern Irish league is not fully professional. пﮟოьεԻ 57 12:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the list of "fully professional leagues" is so largely unsourced such that article itself shouldn't survive an AfD. 99.202.15.61 (talk) 06:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • And your point is? I wasn't referring to any list; it is well known that the IFA Premiership is not fully professional. Do you have a source that states otherwise? пﮟოьεԻ 57 10:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • This book (published in 2007) clearly states that the NI league is semi-professional. End of discussion on that front, methinks. And BTW, simply lacking a number of sources is NOT a stand-alone criteria for deletion (especially in WP-space), and a lot of the entries on that list ARE sourced. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 13:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - in addition to have played in the highest level of football in the country, he has also played at the international level for Gibraltar. Nfitz (talk) 02:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The fact that Gibraltar is NOT a member of FIFA and does not compete at the World Cup makes Nfitz's observation irrelevant. There are a lot of IP's coming in here trying to save this article, which can not be saved in my opinion. Also note that this can be interpreted as a vote if enough of one side shows up and demonstrates a clear consensus with the rules. TaintedZebra (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • TaintedZebra's argument is spurious. Simply because a national team is not a member of FIFA, and doesn't compete in the World Cup, doesn't mean anything. Guadeloupe is neither a member of FIFA nor does it compete in the World Cup, but no one would dream of using that argument against it's team, which ranks ahead of better known teams like Georgia, Albania, Guatemala, and Indonesia. Nfitz (talk) 16:46, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • At least Guadaloupe is an associate CONCACAF member, and it competes in the Gold Cup. Gibraltar is not recognized at all by both FIFA and UEFA, and can compete only against the likes of "national" teams like Isle of Wight, Minorca, Rhodes and Shetland, as can be seen here. --Angelo (talk) 16:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough, but that wasn't the criteria that TaintedZebra tried to establish. Nfitz (talk) 19:12, 21 June 2009 (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.