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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 13:54, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Padraic Cunningham

[edit]

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested on the grounds that he has played in the highest level of Irish football, which is confirmed as not fully pro per WP:FPL, meaning that this does not confer notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Players at the highest level in Ireland have faced deletion going back to 2010 see here where consensus was that they do meet notability at present Galway are in contention for a Europa League spot. Mo ainm~Talk 22:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. The "consensus" that Mo ainm cites above merely shows that GNG trumps NFOOTBALL, which is not an area of contention, especially when this player fails both. Giant Snowman 09:18, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some reliable sources to show he doesn't fail GNG Irish Examiner RTE Extra time.ie goal.com midwest radio Connacht Tribune Do we intend to delete every single player who plays in the top flight of Irish football?Mo ainm~Talk 10:26, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NFOOTY failure. There is no consensus that playing in the League of Ireland makes players are notable (this AfD from April resulted in a unanimous decision to delete). Number 5 7 15:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is coverage in multiple sources not enough to satisfy GNG? Mo ainm~Talk 10:30, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All the examples you put forward are just reports (or previews) on matches that he played in, so no – I would expect to see articles solely focussed on him as a player. But going further than that, due to the nature of sports coverage, you can write a well-referenced article on players playing well down the semi-pro leagues – during a similar debate a few months ago I created a well-referenced article in my userspace on a player playing for the club I support at level eight in England that included four news articles actually focussing on him (not simply match reports) as an example. Even though he plays for my club, I don't think he's a notable footballer, and I don't want Wikipedia filling up with tens of thousands of articles on semi-pro footballers who fall into the same category. Number 5 7 12:31, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply, maybe a change is needed in policy in regard to players who are playing at the highest level in their country, at present Galway are having a very good season and it is not an impossibility that they could qualify for the Europa Cup. Mo ainm~Talk 12:48, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's been suggested and rejected many times in the past; playing at the top level does not make someone notable. The reason we have the fully pro rule is that these are leagues where there is genuinely enough interest to deem the players notable (i.e. in terms of attendances, sponsorship, tv income etc). Number 5 7 13:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails NFOOTY as has not played senior international football nor played in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nothing at all for independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 05:32, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. The "highest level" thing is a bit of a red herring in a way; while the Irish league isn't fully professional, that only means the subject doesn't *automatically* qualify for an article. It's entirely possible for a semi-pro or amateur player to still be notable and well-sourced; this guy appears to be neither, and there's literally nothing substantive in the article. ✤ Fosse 8 ✤ 10:30, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as others have said, no fully pro appearances made and clear failure of GNG Spiderone 11:40, 4 June 2016 (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.