Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Darby

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The result was Nomination Withdrawn CWii(Talk|Contribs) 22:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Stephen Darby

Stephen Darby (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Another Liverpool related non notable player, based on WP:BIO and WP:FOOTY/Notability rules on players having to play at least one professional game John Hayestalk 02:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC) I withdraw my nomination see comments below. John Hayestalk 19:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Deleteper nom, if/when he plays at professional level the article can be recreated English peasant 12:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - he has been on the bench in the Champions League. How the hell can an FA Trophy or Conference match trump this for notability? ArtVandelay13 (talk) 19:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I light of todays comments on WP:FOOTY and the fact that Uefa have a profile on him I'm withdrawing my nomination for afd. John Hayestalk 19:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - until he actually plays. On the bench is nothing. - fchd (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment - Let me get this straight. Being a U-19 international sitting on the bench for Liverpool in a CL match is nothing. Coming off the bench in the 90th minute in a League 2 game without ever touching the ball, and getting axed from the squad the next week is something. Sebisthlm (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Breaking out of retirement to agree with ArtVandelay. This deletion frenzy rather than article improvement is a great example of why I just don't bother anymore. WikiGull (talk) 19:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - per ArtVandelay, Jrphayes and WP:N. Sebisthlm (talk) 21:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Oh, and by AfD:Paul Rodgers. Might I also remind everyone that this article would clear the proposed Notability criteria p5, which is still being debated. Until that is settled, could we put AfD's like this on hold? Sebisthlm (talk) 22:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment - point 5 has gathered very little support, and has not been transferred to the notability criteria as on the project subpage. - fchd (talk) 07:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Comment - this is true, but also remember that our (self-imposed) notability rules have not been accepted by the wider community, see the comments at deletion review, and I suggest that have a profile at the UEFA site, which is a very reliable, and neutral source, in combination with the other sources cause the article to pass the criteria, which in the end is the most important bit anyway. John Hayestalk 09:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Comment - point 5 gathered very little support (and very little discussion) in the debate over the criteria, but it is essentially a codification of AfD:Paul Rodgers. That AfD had 18 participants and voted to keep a player in a similar situation after a lengthy debate. Also, my conclusion of the comments at deletion review is something I have been suspecting for a long time; that it's wrong of us to let the additional criteria (professional football) override the general criteria (significant coverage in reliable sources). Sebisthlm (talk) 10:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Admittedly it isn't just footballers who have been kept/deleted based on broad additional criteria. This archer, about whom so little is recorded that even his first name is a total mystery, got kept based solely on the fact that he competed at the Olympics, which is apparently all that's required for a "keep"...... ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:10, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
        • "it's wrong of us to let the additional criteria (professional football) override the general criteria" Indeed, WP:BIO is very clear that the additional criteria are not a reason to keep or delete an article in themselves, the general criteria is the most important. John Hayestalk 11:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - has not made an appearance in a fully professional league, so fails WP:ATHLETE. Any other criteria developed by WP:FOOTY have not gained acceptance by the community yet, so are not valid. robwingfield «T•C» 09:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment - Just to clarify; are you saying that the additional criteria (professional football) in principle override the general criteria (significant coverage in reliable sources), or that the coverage isn't significant enough? Sebisthlm (talk) 11:34, 23 February 2008 (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.