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. Mark Arsten (talk) 11:50, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Harper (footballer born 1996)[edit]

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

PROD contested by article creator back in May 2012. This player fails WP:NFOOTBALL (as he has not played in a fully-professional league) and WP:GNG (due to lack of significant coverage) - sources are very much WP:ROUTINE and violate WP:BLP1E i.e. some bored journalist has stumbled upon the story of a young player of Scottish heritage playing for one of the world's top clubs, decided it's a bit of a novelty, dedicated 5 minutes to writing a throwaway piece, and that's it. Giant Snowman 15:23, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. He has not played in a fully pro league, failing WP:NSPORT, and the coverage he's received is insufficient to meet WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - does not fail notability criteria. I've added numerous independent reliable sources. The person has been subject to wide coverage in the news. Disagree that it's a 'throwaway' piece, how can it be if its covered several times over in major publications? Also sources are not routine, the whole point of the stories are the person in question, not as included in a part of another report. He is not notable for one 'event' either, notable for belonging to such a major organisation and receiving widespread coverage therefore. Kennedy ^(talk) 16:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

all the news pieces relate to 'young Scot playing for Real Madrid' - WP:BLP1E and WP:ROUTINE apply. There is no "widespread" coverage. Giant Snowman 16:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did of course refer to 'widespread' in relation to the number of independent sources, not the content in each one; the usual meaning of widespread... Kennedy ^(talk) 16:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if it's two sources saying the same thing or fifteen. If what they're saying is trivial (and as you're citing the Daily Record and the Sun, it is) then that's all that matters. Giant Snowman 16:34, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You don't consider the Daily Record or the Sun notable? Probably the two most popular newspapers in Scotland... I don't know what could be an improvement really... Kennedy ^(talk) 20:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for failing WP:ATHLETE. Qworty (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reminds me of the case of "Sri Lanka footballer joins Chelsea" which is true in the end but again, like here, he failed GNG and NFOOTY. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 02:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in Scottish task force's list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - article is about a footballer who has not played in a fully pro league or represented his country at senior level, which means that the article fails WP:NFOOTY. Also fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Mentoz86 (talk) 09:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - He has not played in a fully pro league, failing WP:NSPORT, and the coverage he's received is insufficient to meet WP:GNG.Simione001 (talk) 13:50, 28 September 2012 (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.