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. Black Kite (talk) 23:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Denil Maldonado[edit]

Denil Maldonado (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)

Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Subject has not played in a fully professional league nor has he represented his nation at senior or Olympic level. Simione001 (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 23:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 23:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 01:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Easily meets GNG with sigcov with the listed articles. I don't know how you got the impression that a feature interviews in major newspapers don't indicate notability - they may not be the best source for accuracy on all issues, but that they even exist at all demonstrates GNG has been met, with 5 very good sources - I wouldn't call two of them borderline! A quick google search shows there's more too - even the amount of (not necessarily GNG) other coverage in the last couple of days is impressive - and this article isn't new. This article should never have been nominated. I don't understand how you imply it's a better case than a case that the community overwhelmingly had consensus was a keep, and you vote against keeping! That implies that you aren't imposing community standards here, but trying to change the standards. Nfitz (talk) 19:37, 20 July 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.