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 no consensus. There was agreement that Lago fails WP:NFOOTBALL but that guideline is a floor, not a ceiling; if a player meets the GNG in some other he or she may still be notable. There was no consensus as to whether the sources found were enough. Mackensen (talk) 04:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner Santos Lago[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Speedy deletion per WP:G4 was decline. However, the underlying issue of the last afd still remains. He has still not played in a fully pro league or received significant coverage in reliable sources, meaning the article fails WP:NSPORT and WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and SALT - still fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 20:10, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bosnia and Herzegovina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NOTABILITY. There are search results but they are not WP:RS. --Jersey92 (talk) 03:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP: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) 15:09, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it's easy to find recent media references to this player - though not enough to meet WP:GNG such as [1] [2] [3]. Combine that and him having a long career, the team captain, a very high goal-to-game ratio over such a long period of time, and many Europa League and Champions League appearances then this sticks out against the average non-notable player and requires one to dig deeper. Digging deeper, there is a lot of coverage of his games over the years. And even the occasional deeper feature. Here's a good example [4]. Surely with features like this, this player meets WP:GNG. Nfitz (talk) 22:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jenks24 (talk) 12:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There is plenty of significant coverage in RS, so I believe the article can meet the GNG. I added a recent Globo Esporte article about him and expanded the article slightly, but it needs more work. Although the Bosnian top flight may not be fully-pro, Wagner is among the all-time leading scorers, and more notable than someone with one unremarkable season in a fully-pro league. Jogurney (talk) 15:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the standards in WP:NFOOTY mark someone as being presumed notable; however, failing to meet those standards does not guarantee non-notability. I think Wagner's long career, large number of goals, and three UEFA Champions' League appearances (match details linked from [5]) grant sufficient notability. --Stormie (talk) 01:30, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - He isn't deemed notable as he hasn't played in a fully professional league nor has he any international caps. IJA (talk) 10:39, 26 July 2014 (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.