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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 16:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Bruton[edit]

Lauren Bruton (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)

Second division team captain, but does not meet WP:NFOOTY or WP:GNG. League is not fully professional and has only played for international youth teams. References are routine mentions. Decided against a PROD in case it gets deleted before someone can find additional info out there. Fuebaey (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Player has NOT only played for international youth teams - check again. Clearly passes WP:GNG. Only three women's leagues (all in US) are included in WP:NFOOTY and list is perpetually "incomplete". Article could use expansion, not deletion. Here are some additional potential citations as a start: 1 2, 3 Hmlarson (talk) 00:49, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I'm mistaken, non-senior international appearances are not eligible for WP:NFOOTY #1. She doesn't meet #2 because neither club leagues she's played in, for Arsenal (WPL/WSL) and Reading (WSL2), are fully professional (see bottom of the FPL list). I was unable to find any other non-routine sources (i.e. not stat pages or match reports) for WP:GNG, hence the !PROD. I was hoping someone could find something tangible, maybe on her captaincy, but that doesn't seem to have materialised. Unless you consider Google Search results as actual reliable references, I'm not sure how that supports your comment on notability. Fuebaey (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. as I mentioned WP:GNG is applicable. WP:NFOOTY is pretty much irrelevant to women's football/soccer leagues. Article could use improvement not deletion per WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 19:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 17:44, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Has adequate indicia of notability. Women athletes often have less news coverage and such, it's a systemic bias issue. There also are far fewer pro opportunities for women athletes. Based on her standing vis-a-vis other women in the sport, I'd say GNG is met. Montanabw^(talk) 16:21, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. WP:NFOOTY is almost irrelevant for women's soccer, since the list is incomplete. She's a professional player who already played in one of the main teams in the Tier 1 league in England. Perhaps the article needs improvement, but not deletion.--SirEdimon (talk) 03:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• keep. She plays in a professional league in a major soccer country. Smallchief (talk 21:31, 17 May 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.