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. Subject of article appears to have met notability requirements during the course of the AfD debate. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sebastian Dalgaard[edit]

Sebastian Dalgaard (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)

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 based on speculation as to future appearances, which is never grounds for notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:19, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument completely defies WP:CRYSTAL. – Michael (talk) 22:26, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No it doesn't. WP:CRYSTAL notes that Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. In this case we have a player who as far as I can tell has played every minute of the preseason and is scoring goals. It's almost certain that he will be in the opening day line-up and that event would be notable—as such WP:CRYSTAL is not applicable. As this AFD shouldn't normally close until March 26, and the season starts March 28, it's entirely reasonable to simply hold open the AFD for a few extra hours to ensure that he is in the line-up. Your argument completely defies WP:COMMONSENSE, and you seem to be trying to enforce a non-existent rule. Nfitz (talk) 14:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CRYSTAL also says It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses. Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included. So yes your argument does violate the guideline and it also violates WP:OR. The football project does not keep articles in anticipation of notability. It's whether or not the player is notable at present time. And this player is not notable. – Michael (talk) 21:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have inserted no text in an article that constitutes WP:OR. Go read WP:OR it states that Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. There is no content in that article, nor has there ever been, that says he is starting. There has never been a violation of WP:OR and shame on you for suggesting otherwise! To suggest that I've violated WP:OR is a violation of WP:AGF! I'm merely suggesting that we delay closing the AFD for a few hours because it's blatantly obvious that this player will be either starting on March 28th. Also you have commented that WP:CRYSTAL also says It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses. Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included. I have no idea why you are commenting about this, because there is not one word in the article that this applies to. I suggest that you focus on the article here, and apply WP:COMMONSENSE rather than making up untruths about what is in the article! Nfitz (talk) 22:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not WP:CRYSTALL applies here is a moot point, because WP:CONSENSUS very clearly does. This is a perennial issue and has always been decided the same way. The inadmissibility of speculation as to future appearances as a source of notability is one the strongest and long standing consensuses concerning the notability of footballers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the relevance of WP:CONSENSUS to my request to wait until 7 PM Central Daylight Time on March 28 to close this discussion, because it was very clear that Dalgaard would be in the starting line-up. I do apologize though, as they don't appear to have started until 7:07 pm. Surely a request to wait a few extra hours to close the AFD is only WP:COMMONSENSE given that it saved us the trouble of undeleting this. What I don't get is why we waste our time deleting a player who very clearly is part of the first team days before the season starts instead of applying WP:NORUSH. Nfitz (talk) 02:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:09, 27 March 2015 (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.
More