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) CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of top international association football goal scorers by country[edit]

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

No coverage in WP:RS that this topic is notable. WP is not collection of stats per WP:NOTSTATS. Just a WP:LISTCRUFT. Greenbörg (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 17:22, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 17:22, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:42, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence of notability, NOTSTATS. Giant Snowman 15:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Who is the highest goal scorer for each country is notable as evidenced by their mention on each (mostly) of their individual country's football page, and the fact that every player that nears their county's record gets a chunk of coverage when they are about to pass their predecessor, as evidenced most recently by CR7, but also by many others, including Robbie Keane, Falcao, Messi, and even others who are still some way off, but likely to get there given their youth, eg Wood. This itself I don't believe is the question here, but rather should a combined list of them exist. I suggest it should. This is an article I frequently refer to for easy comparison of those that reach records, to compare for example how many more or less matches these record holders took to reach their tallies. There is nothing in NOTSTATS that suggests this list should not exist. It is not anExcessive listing of unexplained statistics, it is a concise list of explained records. There does not appear to be anything in WP:NOT relevant here, except WP:NOTPAPER which is not a delete argument. The LISTCRUFT argument does not wash with me as of the 12 bullet point Meanings, none apply except arguably #8, and I submit that also doesn't apply as there are many examples of sources that list the top international goal scorers. [1] [2] [3]. Maybe not so many broken out to show only top per country, but refining the information is not against policy. In fact, WP:NOTEVERYTHING suggests A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. This is a good example of summarising information from multiple articles into a concise format. ClubOranje^T 12:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the notion of record goalscorers clearly attracts sufficient coverage to satisfy WP:LISTN. It seems to me relevant that we capture a listing of top goalscorers at the highest level of football, namely senior international. Fenix down (talk) 11:05, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Fenix Down Spiderone 17:44, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Fenix Down.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above reasoning. Macosal (talk) 08:59, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep the accomplishment of being a record international goalscorer for a national team is a much discussed and usually well covered statistic. Inter&anthro (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:19, 15 September 2017 (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.