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. Consensus is that the article does not meet either the general notability guideline or the subject specific guideline Davewild (talk) 20:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Magnus Eikrem[edit]

Magnus Eikrem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics

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

This was originally part of a multi-nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Dudgeon which I closed as "delete". However, I felt that there was enough doubt about whether or not Magnus Eikrem should be deleted that the issue of his notability should be considered in a separate nomination. Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails both WP:ATHLETE (as he has never appeared in a fully-professional league or cup game for his club, or a senior, official international game for his country) and WP:GNG (references are just run-of-the-mill transfer news, match reports etc.) GiantSnowman 17:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Fails WP:ATHLETE. SnottyWong ^squeal 17:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, references given do not meet the test of substantial, in depth coverage of WP:GNG. He does not meet the WP:ATHLETE guidelines either. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 21:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Notable since Eikrem is reserves team captain. Velociraptor888 20:58, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • How does that make him notable??? Name another "reserve team captain". Many leagues don't even have official reserve teams. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - sorry, but I just can't see how being captain of someone's reserves can be seen as a claim of inherent notability, even if it is Man U -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:44, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:NSPORTS criteria, done nothing of particular note. I don't think a profile, couple of run-of-the-mill "kid signs a contract" articles and a few friendly and reserve game match reports - particularly when they are from his cub's own website - count as in depth coverage in reliable sources enough to etch his name in to the enduring annals of history--ClubOranje^T 11:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Note that failing WP:ATHLETE is not sufficient to delete the article - it must be established as also failing the GNG. [1] [2] are sufficient in and of themselves, and other articles linked have substantial comments on the player. Saying that match reports do not establish notability of a sports player is like saying concert reviews do not establish notability of a musician. 96.39.62.90 (talk) 23:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tribal Football is not a reliable source. I don't think one report in a local newspaper (MEN) qualifies as substantial in depth coverage. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are many more articles that are not needed, it is best to get the most reliable source not the most various. --86.166.100.242 (talk) 19:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:22, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Call up to the Norwegian under 21's shows he has attention "just not" in Manchester. Also numerous times on the bench prove that he is a part of the united squad. He would also had gone on loan had he not been deemed "too good enough"--86.166.100.242 (talk) 19:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He would also had gone on loan had he not been deemed "too good enough"" = original research. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:22, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Solskjaer himself said it himself in a interview. Go and find it if you don't believe me((it was better for him to stay then go out on loan)).--86.166.100.242 (talk) 22:30, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Found the link [[3]]--86.166.100.242 (talk) 22:34, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • The source you give says that he didn't go on loan because there was no guarantee that Eikrem would play for the club he would be loaned to, not because Manchester United intend to use him in a first team game. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 17:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • I never claimed that was the case? --86.161.217.212 (talk) 19:12, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:ATHLETE and coverage is little more than trivial mentions in match reports. J Mo 101 (talk) 20:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: fails WP:ATHLETE. Simply has not played a first team professional match yet. To ignore WP:ATHLETE we need sufficient evidence that he is well-known and I don't see that. —Half Price 16:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Many appearances on the bench make it clear he is in the first team picture as well as a senior squad number. failing WP:ATHLETE is not a problem because anyone clued up about reserve team football in England knows who he is. Also the fact that all the sources are "legit" and cannot be called into question in anyway.--MagnusWolfEikrem (talk) 20:32, 9 November 2010 (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.