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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Romain Carbonnier[edit]

Romain Carbonnier (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)

Article about former footballer who made a 2-minute substitute's appearance in France's fully-pro Ligue 2, plus a handful (I haven't been able to find proof of an appearance, but an article indicates he and three other international players made no more than 10 appearances each) of appearances in South Africa's fully-pro Premier Soccer League. Although this appears to satisfy the bright-line of WP:NFOOTBALL, it does not because there is longstanding consensus that a footballer who played a minimal amount in a fully-pro league but comprehensively fails WP:GNG does not actually satisfy NFOOTBALL (see e.g., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phakamani Mngadi). All of the online coverage in French- and English-language sources appear to be routine (database entries or transfer announcements). Jogurney (talk) 14:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Lacks significant coverage and so it fails the GNG. There is no narrative beyond brief notes and there appears to be no potential for any worthwhile expansion. No Great Shaker (talk) 16:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete lacks significant coverage. Our inclusion criteria for footballers are currently too broad at present.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - at least four appearances in FPL (meeting WP:NFOOTBALL) and enough coverage out there for me to be comfortable keeping. Needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 09:11, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are correct that Carbonnier also made 3 appearances in the league for Ajax Cape Town per espnfc.com, but I'm concerned about the lack of local coverage of his time with the club (all of it is passing mentions - none flattering). I don't see how this article would satisfy the GNG. Jogurney (talk) 14:34, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – doesn't meet GNG, just brief mentions and routine game reports [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. I did get a kick out of this (What has Mohammed Diallo (Ivory Coast) brought to Ajax Cape Town? What did the four they signed last season offer? ... Romain Carbonnier (France), nothing to write home about really… none played 10 games. All have a single thing in common; they have all left the team after just a season!) and this (With Ajax skipper Brett Evans suspended, influential winger Franklin Cale injured, and coach Craig Rosslee resting a few regular players, squad members like ... Frenchman Romain Carbonnier ... played a part during some stage of yesterday's 90 minutes. And they failed dismally ... In ... Carbonnier ... , Ajax have simply wasted their foreign quota.). Query: can an article subject be notable for not being notable? – Levivich 19:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do think a footballer can be notable for widely-publicized poor play, but the minimal coverage of Carbonnier doesn't suggest he was a focus of the media or fans (he was just one of a batch of infrequently-used and underperforming international players on Ajax CT). I would need to see much more coverage to believe it passes the GNG. Jogurney (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Good point, I'm reminded of Bill Buckner. – Levivich 00:11, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I actually think the sources provided by Levivich, along with the sources in the article, pass WP:GNG, especially the iol.co.za article and the goal.com article. He did appear in more games in France than the article currently shows. One potential source just says "Gone" [6]... SportingFlyer T·C 01:34, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Ligue de Football Professionnel records a single 2' Ligue 2 appearance for Carbonnier, and they are the most reliable source on Ligue 1 and Ligue 2 appearances from the 2000s and later. Jogurney (talk) 03:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, that La Parisien article covers his time with amateurs Franconville - he played in the Coupe de France with them, but it's still amateur football. Jogurney (talk) 04:00, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The "most reliable source" does not include his appearances for Ajaccio [7] and at least the Clermont-Ajaccio cup match (cannot find a lineup though), and the South African league is also professional - the 2' would be relevant if he never played in another professional match and there wasn't anything we could write on him, but that's not the case here. Thanks for looking into the La Parisien article, I couldn't get it to load. SportingFlyer T·C 04:06, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • I stand corrected (again). Corse Football (a blog, but a reliable one for clubs AJ Ajaccio) has him making a single substitute's appearance against Angers SC in Ligue 2 during 2007. The Coupe de Ligue match was against amateurs Clermont, and is effectively a friendly. I added the appearance to the article's infobox, but it really changes very little as far as establishing notability or passing the GNG. Jogurney (talk) 04:29, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • I mean, we're going to disagree here - I think the African articles show he passes both WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG and is eligible for an article, and this is a more substantial career than some of the technical WP:NFOOTY passes we end up deleting - but just to make an additional correction: Clermont finished 5th in the fully professional Ligue 2 the season of the league cup match (and Ajaccio 9th), equivalent to the English League Cup with the winner receiving a UEFA Cup qualification spot, so Clermont are neither amateurs, nor was the game effectively a friendly. SportingFlyer T·C 04:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'm sorry; I rushed to the conclusion that Clermont were amateurs because they were competing in Championnat National during 2007. However, you're right that they achieved promotion to Ligue 2 before the Coupe de Ligue match in question. Still, Carbonnier's 3 competitive substitute's appearances with Ligue 2 clubs total less than 40 minutes - so let's keep that in perspective. Jogurney (talk) 21:19, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I do not agree that [8] and [9] amount to significant coverage. The "in detail" requirement just isn't there. Yes, Charbonnier is mentioned in the headlines, but each article swiftly moves from routine news about him to other unrelated matters about the team. The handful of league appearances are close to irrelevant in the absence of significant coverage. And on an intuitive point: the article says he "is last known to have played for FC Montceau Bourgogne". If no-one knows where his career ended up, he can't really have been that notable. Significant coverage really means a global overview of a player's career; otherwise we can't have a biography and need to make silly statements like "is last known...". --Mkativerata (talk) 08:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Lacks significant coverage, failing GNG Taewangkorea (talk) 23:27, 17 August 2019 (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.