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. Courcelles (talk) 01:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gareth Thomas (American footballer)[edit]

Gareth Thomas (American 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)

A WP:A7 candidate. I could delete or redirect this myself, but I ask for the opinions of other editors. Should this article be deleted, or should it be WP:REDIRECTed to Birmingham Bulls (American football)? Shirt58 (talk) 11:02, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I am not finding significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. The article currently relies on sources that are not independent (e.g., self-published by the sport's governing body, BAFA, or the team) and/or that consist of routine game coverage (i.e., not focused on G. Thomas). These are insufficient to satisfy WP:GNG. Based on my searches, G. Thomas doesn't appear sufficiently notable for a standalone article under WP:GNG or WP:NGRIDIRON. Cbl62 (talk) 19:20, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Non-notable amateur/semi-pro British player of American football. This subject presents an interesting challenge for American editors reviewing it for notability, because we are usually familiar with the leagues, conferences and teams of college and professional football players in the United States. It is, however, clear that the subject is not a player in a top-tier pro football league like the NFL or CFL, and BAFA's various tiers are on par with the "national" American football leagues in Australia, Austria, France and Germany -- which is to say, not nearly as competitive as Division I college football in the United States, and with a much, much smaller fan following. That's the background, and there is no applicable specific notability guideline for these amateur, semi-pro and lower tier pro players. That means they must satisfy the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG, with significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources. The references for this article are a collection of sources from brief game summaries (no significant), the league and team websites (not independent), fansites, blogs, and even a sports photographer's website (not reliable). This case clearly demonstrates how a clever editor may stitch together as fairly detailed article from various online references and the subject still not be notable. Our concept of "notability" seeks to evaluate how widely known a subject is, using significant coverage in independent reliable sources as a proxy. Here, such coverage does not exist. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:21, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I agree with what you've said above. Under the vague guideline WP:NGRIDIRON, the BAFANL should be considered a fully professional league, and as such this and many other players would be considered notable. There is a severe problem concerning the US bias that currently exists on en.wikipedia, especially within sports articles. This player clearly fails GNG, but that's exactly why we have GRIDIRON, which states players need to "have appeared in at least one regular season or post season game in... any other top-level professional league". FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 14:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD reflect a prudent consensus that the BAFANL is not a "top-level professional league". The level of talent is not on par (or even close) with the Arena Football League, Canadian Football League, National Football League, American Football League, All-America Football Conference or United States Football League, which are the examples provided in the guideline of "top-level professional leagues". To this date, American football is primarily a North American sport, and I doubt there is a European league that would qualify as "top-level" as the phrase is used in WP:NGRIDIRON. Cbl62 (talk) 01:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• @FoCuSandLeArN: You're confusing the specific notability standard for American/Canadian football per WP:NGRIDIRON and that for association football/soccer per WP:NFOOTBALL. The specific guideline for American/Canadian football players is not defined by reference to "fully professional league," like association football/soccer, but by reference to players who have participated in one or more regular season games in specific top-tier, high-notability leagues such as the CFL and NFL (and several of the present NFL's predecessor leagues). Cbl62's description of the NGRIDRION guideline above is correct. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Nope, I was quoting NGRIDIRON verbatim. The question is what constitutes "any other" top-level professional league, for which I see no discussion here (alas AfD wouldn't be the appropriate venue) or elsewhere. I am pointing out the weaknesses presented by the guideline, I am not commenting as to whether BAFANL is or is not a professional league. We see this time and time again at AfD and AfC; we wouldn't if the guidelines were clearer. FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 12:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not notable as a football player since he fails WP:NGRIDIRON. Routine sports coverage and passing mentions do not meet [[WP:GNG]. The fact it's an autobiography is just the final straw.Jakejr (talk) 14:44, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I find the lack of independent sources unimpressive.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2015 (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.