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. The consensus isn't resounding—we're in borderline no consensus territory here. Either way, there's no consensus to delete. --BDD (talk) 23:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Judan Ali[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

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

Concerns about notability were original raised at WT:FOOTBALL and I am bringing this here for wider discussion. This article may look well-written/impressive/notable but on closer inspection the subject does not appear to meet any relevant notability guidelines, namely WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. It reads like a CV and I have doubts about the veracity of some of the claims, especially as the article creator seems to be trying to promote Mr. Ali on Wikipedia in defiance of our guidelines. Giant Snowman 16:04, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 16:07, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as probably not notable. Most of the sources are dubious as they seem like nothing more than blogs. – Pee Jay 16:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (babble) @ 16:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (gas) @ 16:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (confer) @ 16:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:01, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as obviously notable. "This article may look well-written/impressive/notable but on closer inspection the subject does not appear to meet any relevant notability guidelines, namely WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. It reads like a CV and I have doubts about the veracity of some of the claims, especially as the article creator seems to be trying to promote Mr. Ali on Wikipedia in defiance of our guidelines. GiantSnowman 16:04, 27 May 2013 (UTC)" - comment was relevant 3 days before extreme editing by GiantSnowman. Page as it stands is almost correct with factual inaccuracies surrounding Blackburn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sxu02msg (talk • contribs)

I've barely edited the article since AFD, only to revert your blanking of material. Why is Mr. Ali "obviously" notable? Giant Snowman 18:11, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
complete delete was a mistake - thought i was on test page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sxu02msg (talk • contribs) 12:00, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If this article is deleted, I have no doubt that it will be taken as yet another example of the institutional racism that Mr Ali claims to be an expert on. I still think it should be deleted though. – Pee Jay 10:32, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Peculiar comment Peejay. Why bring racism up? I would think Wikipedia prides itself in being one of the most neutral platforms around and that the founders would be most disappointed with anyone manipulating or trying to control an article as a means to attack or supress an individual. I have read no such expert claims, just someone reporting on their experiences within the industry many years ago. If someone as 'notable' as Chantelle Houghton is on wikipedia, then of course an individual such as Mr. Ali with an actual career and who has a unique position to raise awareness on contentious issues should be documented, for it's in the public interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sxu02msg (talk • contribs) 11:48, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PeeJay mentioned racism becuase it was brought up in the article, and your comparison with Chantelle Houghton is a case of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Giant Snowman 12:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Again, more peculiar activity here as you seem to be able to respond on Peejays behalf - how do you know that's why he brought it up. Or perhaps the same person is running 2 accounts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sxu02msg (talk • contribs) 15:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, because PeeJay and I have worked together at Wikipedia for a good number of years and we think along similar lines. If you believe we are the same editor, please use WP:SPI - but seeing as your accusations are entirely unfounded, I strong suggest you do not repeat them. Please also sign your comments using ~~~~ Giant Snowman 15:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No intelligent reader would read above as founded or unfounded. It can be innocently deduced. And you sound threatening, why would I need to repeat anything? I don't think a direct accusation can sart with 'perhaps', I guess it is up to you if you want to speak on each others behalfs, they are your accounts. But newcomers to editing shouldn't feel any less of a right to be part of this community just because you say you have been editing for years or feel that they have less standing as most don't have 'colleagues' present to back them up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sxu02msg (talk • contribs) 18:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your posts are becoming increasingly hard to decipher, please be clearer in future - and please sign your comments with ~~~~, as previously requested. Giant Snowman 18:41, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - I think he just about passes WP:GNG based on the sources in the article -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ - On reading this it is impossible to tell via reliable sources just why Ali is notable in Wiki terms. Lots of smoke and mirrors but no substance. Was he a player at a notable level? No, he trialled for many clubs and played with Ray Parlour etc but never played pro football. Is he a coach at anything other than youth level? Not that I can see referenced. Even the reference given in the lead shows only a list of articles from a Chinese website. I have no doubt he has been in and around football for many years. He seems to be known by the owners of Blackburn Rovers and has had his photo taken with people within football. Yes he has had a career in football but at a very low level for inclusion on Wiki. In a nutshell he does not pass WP:FOOTYN nor WP:GNG.--Egghead06 (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

n.b. Editor has switched to keep; see penultimate vote. --BDD (talk) 23:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- The only ground that I could see for keeping the article would be his association with the Taiewan national team, and I doubt that is enough. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I believe the sources qualify for this to stay on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordan7886 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~— Jordan7886 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.~~

Keep these sources are credible and have to stay on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Queenmaxine12 (talk • contribs) 11:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Queenmaxine12 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Looks like a legion of SPAs are arriving......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, hence why I have opened a SPI. Giant Snowman 12:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This sources are proven and therefore I believe this has to stay on wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carryanne (talk • contribs) 18:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

— Carryanne (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep okay this sources mean this article for wiki should be kept positive and stay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denmark79 (talk • contribs) 18:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

— Denmark79 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep these sources are legitimate and should stay on wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meggsie248 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC) — Meggsie248 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete - no indication this individual meets notability guidelines, namely the ones cited by the nominator, due to not having had a football career where he has played or managed a top team. C 679 07:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. Clearly fails WP:NFOOTBALL because he hasn't managed a fully pro club or a senior national team. – Michael (talk) 09:18, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - lovely, no clue why I have logged on since 29th May and have further aggressive acts towards me from Giant Snowman!!, I am learning and now get this 'signing posts' thing. Sxu02msg (talk) 12:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I see that this article does not meet WP:NFOOTBALL, but it does meet WP:GNG. It is an individual who is first British Asian breaking into the professional area and merits documenting. Sxu02msg (talk) 12:11, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 16:14, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relist rationale: I closed this discussion as 'no consensus' with the following comments: " There is no argument that the subject does not meet WP:NFOOTBALL but there is a difference of opinion regarding him meeting WP:GNG. Unfortunately no one is saying why the avaible sources do or don't meet WP:GNG making it impossible to determine which argument is stronger. The number of keep !votes did not contribute to my decision." An editor asked if I could re-open allowing folks to better explain their opinion on the matter. J04n(talk page) 16:17, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That "editor" is the nominator (diff). Unscintillating (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I saw the topic's name in the title of one of the references and figured that would be a good place to start. The source is a daily newspaper published in London. For the purpose of evaluating wp:notability, I'm not interested in the hypothetical future job, but the article is in-depth and focused on the topic.

Ian Herbert (27 December 2012). "From Bollywood to Ewood: Judan Ali in challenging new role". The Independent. Retrieved 2013-06-05. "Ali had a role in the casting for the 2007 feature Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal – a rags-to-riches story set in west London's Asian football-playing community which was, in part, inspired by his own struggle for a breakthrough in the game...

Seeing that a film was made about the topic (even if "in part") and observing the presence of 14 additional references in the article, closes the case for me without proceeding to look for sources on Google and Google news. The concerns of the nomination that the article is promotional I'm not seeing, but there are "Promotional?" inline tags available. The concern about veracity of claims can be addressed with Template:fact tags. The second sentence of the article is a sentence fragment, and there are other quality issues here. The assertion in the nomination about what the article creator "seems" to be doing is an ad hominem and should not be a part of this discussion. Unscintillating (talk) 17:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a strong source, but one is not enough for me. If you find a second source of similar quality I will happily change my mind. Giant Snowman 17:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without evidence to the contrary, we assume as per WP:AGF that topics are notable. The second point you haven't addressed is that the film itself is a second source. As per the nutshell of WP:N, the "world at large" has given attention to the topic. Since films, like books, are enduring, the film also represents attention "over a period of time". Is your minimum standard for WP:GNG higher than having one's life story covered in part in a film? Unscintillating (talk) 21:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If the film is a second source it is odd that neither the Wiki article on this film nor the IMDB.com entry for this film mention Mr Ali. IMDB has no entries for him at all.Egghead06 (talk) 00:17, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N states, "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity..." "What links here" includes Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal. A newspaper that our article calls, "the world's most popular news site" provides the following:

Laure James (28 December 2012). "VIDEO: Impending Blackburn coach Ali had a leading role in Bollywood comedy... (not sure that will help at Ewood Park)". dailymail.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-06-05. ...his leading role in shaping the Bollywood comedy Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal, which features a lead character based on him, inspired by his own struggle to break through into the game.

Unscintillating (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLPSOURCES states "Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources." The Daily Mail is a tabloid and unless both verifiable and more noteworthy material is available it should be removed (along with all the other claims which rely on tabloids).--Egghead06 (talk) 04:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The previous post is a BLP violation, as talk-page [word redacted] contentious material requires references. I won't remove it myself, since I'm involved. Unscintillating (talk) 05:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above is direct from WP:BLPSOURCES.--Egghead06 (talk) 05:51, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know if this is a RS? Giant Snowman 18:31, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to be a very slick blog site. Articles appear to be user-submitted.[1] Hack (talk) 01:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete Still does not pass WP:NFOOTBALL and does not pass WP:NACTOR. He has been around the fringes and has not yet done anything which makes him notable.--Egghead06 (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Probably enough to pass WP:GNG. I've added a few sources myself. The SPAs aren't helpful, mind. Walls of Jericho (talk) 00:25, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment From espnfc.com:

Richard Jolly (28 December 2012). "Singh quashes rumours over Judan Ali". ESPN FC. Retrieved 2013-06-06. Judan Ali, whose attempts to earn a playing career formed the basis of the 2007 film Dhan Dhana Dhan Goal...

Unscintillating (talk) 06:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is already being used in the article. On his football career it contains - "But Rovers say it was a coincidence that Ali, a former Arsenal trainee who has led India's Under-15 team, led a community youth project in Dagenham and managed Accrington Stanley Bowles, was at the club's Brockhall training complex the day after Berg's departure. "He was a guest of the club and has been here for about a week or 10 days. His visit has been planned for months," said Rovers' global advisor Shebby Singh. "He seems to have got caught up in the crossfire." Didn't work for Blackburn but is a YOUTH coach.--Egghead06 (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As an inclusionist and I having sourced what I believe is a second reliable reference, I have changed my stance to 'Keep'. Think it passes WP:GNG though as to whether he is notable for his footballing career or being the basis for a film, I'm undecided.--Egghead06 (talk) 21:32, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You have strucken one of your delete-vote, but you still have an un-struck vote from 29 May :) Mentoz86 (talk) 09:17, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - I believe this subject passes the WP:GNG, even though most of the sources are from the period after the sacking of Berg, they detail most of his career. Mentoz86 (talk) 09:17, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.