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. postdlf (talk) 21:02, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marco Hidalgo[edit]

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

~~No assertion of notability and~~ unsourced BLP. ~~Sure they might have played in the nationals but apart from that they don't have any notable achievements.~~ NSPORTS holds that, "The article must provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the criteria." which the article fails to do, it might meet NFOOTBALL but it fails the most basic requirement for every sports-related article. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 9:59pm • 10:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject clearly meets WP:NFOOTBALL, it's a pity the nominator did not take a little more time to familiarise himself with Wikipedia policy. WWGB (talk) 11:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Having read that I see that it does meet the Criteria for inclusion, but "The article must provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the criteria." There are NO reliable sources. —Ancient Apparition • Champagne? • 9:27am • 22:27, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - So a reference to Marco Hidalgo as a current player on the front page of the premier division club's website [1] is not a reliable source? That was already in the article when you nominated it for deletion. WWGB (talk) 23:14, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~. Hidalgo plays for a fully professional team in Chilean Primera División, which is the highest tier of football in Chile. This seems to meet WP:NFOOTY. The sources provided seem to confirm the information in the article, meager though it may be. It's thin, and an obvious stub, but it looks OK to me. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 17:49, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Good points, below - this league isn't quite at the FPL level demanded by WP:NFOOTY. Put me under Weak Delete then. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 23:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wavering delete on line in sand. Actually WP:NFOOTBALL specifies they should play in a FPL as listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football/Fully_professional_leagues, which does not list Chile in the fully professional section. For a player that played every week one might spend the time debating whether "only 12 players on each team are required to be professional" is good as an FPL considering the player would likely have the appropriate coverage and the "requirement" is likely surpassed by most teams and playing top level in Chile is probably a bigger achievement than 4th tier England. For a bit part player with 4 appearances it would be nice if coverage outside match reports and player profile listings were forthcoming....--ClubOranje^T 09:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 17:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I'd normally use WP:COMMONSENSE in borderline cases such as this, but with only one appearance in a semi-pro league in 2 years, this guy fails WP:NFOOTBALL, as well as WP:GNG. Giant Snowman 18:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Has not played in a fully pro league and has no significant coverage in reliable independent sources, failing WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:GNG. Argyle 4 Life^talk 01:29, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The sourcing at WP:FPL indicates that the Chilean Primera Division is not fully pro, meaning he fails WP:NSPORT, and there is no indication of significant coverage, meaning he also fails WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:30, 30 March 2011 (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.