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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:36, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grzegorz Podstawek[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page has long been an orphan for years and has gone without any expansion attempts. The page is two sentences with one large photo and an infobox that hasn't been updated. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:27, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:55, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 20:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Article appears to fail WP:GNG. I created this article in 2008 before I understood that the GNG needed to be met. Looking at online Polish language coverage now, Przegląd Sportowy has a few interviews and Wyborcza Gazeta has an interview with the subject at the end of his four-year spell in the Polish top division, but there isn't enough in-depth secondary coverage available anywhere. I guess it's to be expected for a journeyman who only played in the top division towards the end of his career. Jogurney (talk) 15:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Poland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. I am not sure if he meets Polish Wikipedia criteria (if not, I'll nominate him for deletion there, checking now). But I don't see how he meets WP:GNG here. He did play in Ekstraklasa ("the top Polish professional league for men's association football teams") but I don't think that, in itself, should make him notable (as far as I can tell, Wikipedia:Notability (sports)/Association football is depreciated, and I don't see a similar replacement). PS. My BEFORE found one press-release-level coverage of his recent career like [1], but again, I don't think that's enough meet GNG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:19, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There's dozens of articles here and here where he's mentioned showing that he got regular coverage.KatoKungLee (talk) 23:45, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the sources provided above?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:41, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per KatoKungLee. Player with extensive pro career including almost 100 appearances in fully pro Ekstraklasa and has many sources. Article need improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 07:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The links provided by KatoKungLee above are simply search results for Podstawek at gol24.pl and sport.pl. As I already mentioned, there is a lot of primary, routine and trivial coverage of Podstawek (Q&A interviews, match reports, transactional coverage) and these search results appear to be just that. If you bothered to go through the results and found something secondary and in-depth please feel free to post it. Jogurney (talk) 15:21, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: BLP, fails GNG and BIO. BEFORE showed no independent reliable sources with significant coverage. WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"' and none have been found. // Timothy :: talk 14:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Agreed with others above that the transactional reports etc. are nowhere close to being SIGCOV.

JoelleJay (talk) 02:58, 23 September 2023 (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.