Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean Carlos Chera

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

In case anybody requires an explanation how I arrived at this decision, as it is a bit borderline: There seems to be only one reliable source, an article repeated in USA Today and other media. What tipped the balance is firstly the weak reasons in some of the "keep" comments (specifically, those of necronudist, Portillo, and I don't understand Minfo); and secondly, I think we should be extremely cautious in having articles about living children. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jean Carlos Chera

10 year old schoolboy who fails WP:BIO. Delete BlueValour 19:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete Fails WP:BIO. I added an {{unreferenced}} template in July and the article has not been improved or even a single citation added. --ElKevbo 19:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Adequate sources have been added to convince me that this subject meets WP:BIO. --ElKevbo 05:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep You're crazy!! FOOL! This is one of the most promising youngster! HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ANY VIDEOS?? Ahahah you're fool! You are demolishing every article of top-level youngster in this Jimbopedia! How sick. --necronudist 19:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Please be civil to other editors, some of your language is highly inappropriate ChrisTheDude 00:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Google turns up 26,000 hits with his name. He has his own website and I also found a number of newspaper articles about him. --Pinkkeith 19:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - he's ten years old, for crying out loud. If he makes it as a pro then add him in but not until then. Qwghlm 20:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment You can't delete or not delete an article purely based on age. --Pinkkeith 20:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment - the point is that he doesn't meet WP:BIO. There are thousands of kids with potential; they get articles here when that potential is realised by playing for the first team of a significant club. WP is not a crystal ball. BlueValour 20:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment Well, that wasn't the point that you made, but it does pass WP:BIO based on WP:GT. There is no crystal ball to this article at all, it is all based on present information and known fact. --Pinkkeith 21:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Comment What "known fact?" There is not a single source cited in the entire article. I am particularly leery of this becoming another AFD where the article is kept because of references cited in the AFD discussion that never make it into the article thus defeating the entire purpose of this discussion and WP:V. --ElKevbo 14:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • We can, however, delete an article if no reliable sources are provided when challenged under verifiability policy. Pinkkeith, can you point us to featured coverage in mainstream media? Some of those are needed to let us keep the article. Being signed to a youth team isn't notable enough to get thousands of other kids their own WP articles. Barno 20:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Here is a USA Today article on him. In there the writer mentions that he was covered in numerous other newspapers. --Pinkkeith 20:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
      • - fine but he has achieved nothing in the adult world - the press references are the result of a splendid publicity campaign for his video but that doesn't confer notability. BlueValour 20:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
        • That's blatent ephebiphobia. Reread the article, the entire article is talking about the video and how it made him notable. --Pinkkeith 21:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep per WP:BIO. Google News Archive search yields 74 unique hits- more than enough to qualify as "the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person." How old the subject is and the method in which he was made notable isn't relevant; the subject meets WP:BIO. --Rory096 21:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - most of the content, apart from his birthdate, fails WP:V. The Ghits mean we can keep the article not that we must. They are all the result of a single video being published on the internet and they have all picked up the same story. Example of the content "He has recently claimed that he dreams to play for FC Barcelona and his favourite player is Ronaldinho." We used to attempt to be a serious encyclopaedia. BlueValour 16:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete-So he's a child prodigy, that doesn't make him notable. Some of my friends are amazing at basketball, but they don't have any articles. As above, if he makes it to the pros (or college, if Brazil has a college league, I dunno), then we can always repost. DoomsDay349 Happy Halloween! 21:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • You're absolutely right, being a child prodigy does not make him notable. However, having over 70 news articles about him does. --Rory096 00:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete When he has played for Manchester United, Arsenal, Porto, Eindhoven or Real Madrid he will have earned his article. Until then it is worth remembering that, at least in the UK, it would be highly improper for professional clubs to express an interest in a 10 year old, let alone to 'openly court' them. Emeraude 22:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, and Emeraude. Postdlf 23:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. HornetMike 23:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Absolutely delete, has not achieved anything serious in football, and might be burnt out by the time he's 12 :-) ChrisTheDude 00:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I've reviewed some of these news articles. I can read only the English ones, which are basically the same novelty one-shot story, repeated, or something like the USA today story, which is more about how everyone is famous on the Internet than a biographical source for an article. Doesn't meet the thrust of WP:BIO. Demi T/C 00:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep but the entry should be moved away from that of a professional footballer, and skewed more towards 21st century curiosity Superlinus 12:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Superlinus. aLii 14:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete, miserably fails WP:BIO, as well as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. – Elisson • T • C • 16:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Can you please explain how it fails WP:BIO? It seems to quite clearly meet it to me. --Rory096 20:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete, as per Johan Elisson. 17:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Keep this is classic wikipedia group dynamics trying to destroy this young mans article who is being called the next pele. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)

I also think that it shouldnt matter weather he plays at the top level. Thats bias because we also include players names from 3rd divisions, or from lesser countries. This kid is at Santos FC now i believe, which means hes playing for a good team. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)

He doesn't play for the Santos first team, though. Or are you suggesting that any kid who's a member of the Under-11 team of Manchester United, Real Madrid, etc, should get a WP article.....? ChrisTheDude 09:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
If they're talented, they already have a BBC article, they're everywere considered as a worldwide prospected youngster, yes. You are deleting all the top-youngsters article, shame on you man. --necronudist 10:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
If you look higher up this page you'll see that it wasn't me that nominated this article, so please don't make uncivil comments aimed solely at me ChrisTheDude 10:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
So, shame on you and your friend. I'm not making uncivil comments, YOU (yeah yeah and your friend) are making uncivil actions here. Let's delete Giovanni dos Santos and Mati Fernandez...c'mon! Who the hell are them?? Had they win a Ballon d'Or? Are they supermodel overpaid untalented footballers? Delete'em! What are you waiting for?? You're (plural) just football-ignorants who are destroying basis of football here in Jimbopedia. --necronudist 10:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Mati Fernandez doesn't appear to have an article to delete.... ChrisTheDude 14:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Wouldnt adding the sources such as the times and guardian, while linking to his videos from youtube help the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure about YouTube, as anyone can put their own videos on there and that wouldn't necessarily demonstrate notability outside his own family. Citing mainstream media sources would help, though ChrisTheDude 14:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
This is the demonstration that you are only a football-ignorant who doesn't know what he's doing, and he's doing this just because of his ignorance. How sick. You don't know what are you deleting, man. --necronudist 19:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
You've already been asked to cease your uncivil remarks and personal attacks. It's unnecessary and unwelcome. And it most certainly isn't convincing anyone to "vote" as you did in this AfD discussion. --ElKevbo 22:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
You haven't understood anything. I said to delete it! I'm not tryin' to convince anyone. And, however, it seems there are many youngster-supporters here. Again, I'm not making uncivil remarks or personal attacks, I'm just speaking frankly and your (plural) football-ignorance is clearly demonstrated. Next time I'll delete Adolf Hitler because of his NN and then I'll complain for the insults... --necronudist 10:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, you can't compare the article on a player who has played nearly 70 matches in the top professional league of a country with a ten year old child who plays for a youth team - one clearly meets WP:BIO, the other clearly doesn't.... ChrisTheDude 08:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=carlos+chera please watch the kid if you havent yet seen him, and i believe this type of article is similar to the internet phenomenons or notable youtubers articles Portillo

The articles on notable YouTubers such as Geriatric1927 cite sources which show where their YouTube activities were detailed in the mainstream media - if the claim is now that this particular article should be kept because Chera has achieved some form of "internet celebrity" then such sources need to be added to this article too.... ChrisTheDude 09:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe we simply need time to fix the article because clearly the mainstream sources can be located, also i found a blog which might help with the whole generation-y web 2.0 crap that youtube is about. portillo

http://jeancarlosfootball.blogspot.com/

i also found his official biography http://www.cherasite.com/bio.html

  • Strong Delete YouTube is not a source as per Wiki policy (ditto blog sites, and self promotional Ghits). Wiki is not for crystal balling doktorb wordsdeeds 14:44, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete: He is a kid. He has made no professional appearances / international appearances (the legality if he had would be questionable). 15:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


Many of the users are very bias against the idea of a 7yr old having its own article or the fact that his only a child prodigy, but indeed we have a child prodigy article. Im definately getting a sense of outright bias and a feeling that many of the voters here are americans. portillo

Unfortunately I'm Italian. --necronudist 16:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Off the top of my head - me, ChrisTheDude, Qwghlm and Oldelpaso are British, Ellisson's Swedish. So there goes that theory. HornetMike 09:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
CommentFor the record, I am British. Also for the record, reasons for delete vote on this page are almost entirely as per policy. No mention of any kind of envy or bias at all. doktorb wordsdeeds 12:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep He is a Child footballing prodigy, his name turns out 35,600 hits now. Kurt000 13:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Maldini's 9-years-old son AfD. No more notable than him, in my opinion. --Angelo 00:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - I think most of the delete (and some of the keep) votes are completely missing the point. Of course this kid isn't a notable footballer. He is however notable as an internet/media phenomenon. Wikipedia has plenty of articles for such people, as an example go look at Mahir Çağrı. Then at the bottom of his page have a look at the categories he's placed in. When someone comes to Wikipedia and searches for "that kid i saw clips of on TV" or "that kid my mate sent me videos of" and who's name give 35,000 google hits... He should be here! aLii 15:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per norm. м info 23:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - I wonder if there is a misunderstanding here? If you are a child prodigy as a piano player you can play the piano. If you are a child prodigy as a mathematician you can do complicated sums in your head. Here, the kid undoubtedly has unusual ball skills but that doesn't make him a footballer. I also don't see him as a 'internet/media phenomenon' with any longevity - with YouTube such phenonima come and go like snow in the sun. TerriersFan 00:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
He was born as a YouTube phenomen but now he's known by all of the users above, has google entries and BBC articles. Guys, you wanna delete him, let's do it. Simply there are people who search for him and people who know him, there are many articles on paper magazines about him, but if you are too zealous to keep a 9-years-old top-youngster 'cause "well, dear Watson, it fails WP:BIO =_= ahem" let's do it. Do it and stop arguing bullshits. --necronudist 09:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
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.