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. Per NFOOTY (go to the talkpage of NFOOTY if you want to change the language of the criteria for inclusion) Keeper | 76 03:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tomasz Kowalski[edit]

Tomasz Kowalski (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 where no reason was given. Player has made one appearance in a fully professional league and has a couple of seasons at minor teams in non-professinal leagues. Technically passes WP:NFOOTY as has played in a fully professional league, but fails WP:GNG by a mile. No real indication of substantial reliable sources. Fenix down (talk) 13:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - meets NFOOTBALL - as he is early in his career it is not surprising he doesn't quite meet GNG yet, but we should allow the benefit of the doubt. If he still doesn't meet GNG in a few years then we can re-consider. GiantSnowman 18:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NFOOTBALL is not relevant when a player does not make GNG even closely. Frankly quite appalling conduct from an admin link GS who should know that wikipedia is not a place where articles are created and then left "for a few years" to see if they become notable. I have no issue with recreation once the player is an established pro and is therefore generally notable however at the moment he is not and cannot be described in any way as notable. Fenix down (talk) 07:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • There is plenty of precedent for an article such as this one, many thounsands and more. This one is no different from all the others. Simione001 (talk) 07:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - meets NFOOTBALL. Has played in a fully professional league.Simione001 (talk) 05:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - As I've said in this AfD: I generally agree with Fenix down, 1 or 2 appearances does not confer notability. Instead of creating articles on footballer once they first enter the field in a professional match, we should try to make the article establish notability - i.e. explain why this particular footballer is notable. My main concern in this case, is that if we decide to delete this article, when would it be appropiate to re-make it? When he has played 5 matches, 10 matches? I say we should give the creator some time to improve the article, and if the subject still fails WP:GNG in a couple of months, we could nominate it for deletion again. Mentoz86 (talk) 11:26, 13 March 2013 (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.