Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sports

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sports. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sports|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sports. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Sports

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. ✗plicit 14:00, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UNTV Cup Season 1

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

These are individual seasons of the UNTV Cup, an amateur basketball league for charity aired by UNTV with teams composed of players from different Philippine government agencies. While the general tournament per se may be notable, individual seasons are not. This has been tagged for years, and is almost exclusively referenced to UNTV or to UNTV Cup, a case of WP:PRIMARY. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:42, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, and Philippines. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:42, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reason, as part of a series:

Howard the Duck (talk) 15:49, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Events. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:34, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: UNTV Cup Executive Face Off 2017 is a previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:29, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've notified Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines about this discussion. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:41, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with the deletion of these pages. The individual seasons lack independent coverage and rely mostly on primary sources like UNTV. They don't meet notability guidelines on their own. AdobongPogi (talk) 04:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom. I think it is not necessary to create season of UNTV since it was a primary source. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:07, 21 July 2025 (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.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ICC Asia

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

No such organization exists, complete WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and made-up. Asian Cricket Council is the actual organization. Vestrian24Bio 23:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Cricket, and Asia. Shellwood (talk) 23:30, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Vestrian24Bio 09:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete looks made up, as no sources suggest it exists. Even if it does, fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:44, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Redirect To Asian Cricket Council. Don't see any reason why it would be inaccurate unless it is WP:OR and/or WP:SYNTH. This is tough though, but definitely Don't Keep as standalone article. Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:57, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the same as the Asian Cricket Council though. The ACC is a subordinate of the ICC, but ICC Asia is just a grouping together of ICC members presumably within the ICC power structure (if "ICC Asia" is even a real thing). Joseph2302 (talk) 08:24, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and merge if there is anything unique from here to Asian Cricket Council to clear up possible confusions, as if the content is checked both articles seems similar also found this source 1 , which helps further prove my point.Lorraine Crane (talk) 19:00, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No source suggest it existence. Asian Cricket Council is responsible for cricket in Asia Price Zero|^talk 16:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is an internal subdivision of the ICC with no significant independent coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Z3r0h3r000 (talk) 09:36, 4 July 2025 (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.

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. Goldsztajn (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Brandt (sportscaster)

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

Restored previously deleted article; same concerns (notability, sourcing, etc.) May be AI-generated. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Television, and Pennsylvania. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 18:31, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:SPORTSPERSON. I ran the text through a AI detector (which aren't always accurate) and only small pieces of text were flagged. Notaoffensivename (talk) 19:09, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @R2025kt: has edited the article's talk page while logged out. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 19:41, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, Radio, and Sports. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:49, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems to have been quite prominent as a broadcaster, see SIGCOV e.g. here, here, here, here, here, here, here, etc. Clearly notable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:22, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Dave Brandt (sportscaster) is easily notable. See 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KatoKungLee (talk • contribs) 13:27, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Like the others, I did not have to spend much time before finding for myself the numerous reliable secondary sources supporting WP:GNG and WP:NOTABILITY]. Zach^H007 22:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Odd-looking discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Newspaper sources given in the comments above are enough for notability. Should be incorporated into the article, but we are fine for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There seems to be sufficient notability here, particularly given the newspaper sources. There was an era before the internet and sources from back then are sufficient if the article still meets WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV which in this case he does. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 20:14, 9 July 2025 (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.

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. As U.S. Youth Soccer Olympic Development Program, the IDed redirect appears likely to be deleted as well. If another ATD is IDed, happy to restore behind the redirect Star Mississippi 01:54, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Illinois ODP

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

Creator seriously removing speedy deletion tags on article created by themselves, Article generally looks promotional, fails WP:GNG fails to have significant coverage, not properly writings, lacks inline citations. Allblessed (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Sports. Allblessed (talk) 20:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This program is not a promotional piece or a non-notable subject. It is a state affiliate of U.S. Youth Soccer and has produced multiple players who went on to compete at the professional and international level—including Olympic medalists like Casey Krueger. The article is being actively revised to remove any non-neutral language and to include coverage from independent and reliable sources.

If you feel parts of the article were too close to promotional or lacked sufficient citations, that’s a fair concern—but it’s something that can be improved through editing rather than deletion. Milicz (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ and keep on improving. Nominator is right that the article could be improved, so I have tagged the article accordingly with the issues they have identified (more and better references needed, needs to be revised to be more neutral in tone, likely contains original research). I have also added {{citation needed}} tags throughout, and added a reference and confirmed that there is other significant coverage that could be added (via ProQuest). In any case, the reasons given essentially amount to an argument to delete because cleanup is required, and this is invalid per WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP. (Even though the desire for cleanup is appreciated.) Furthermore, there is no mention of any WP:BEFORE search. Strongly advise nominator to gain more experience in reading Wikipedia guidelines and editing in their areas of competence before nominating more articles for deletion. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you see [1] there is likely a possible COI, tho I’m still checking, my issue is why the creator keeps removing tags, moving articles back to mainspace, creator lacks experience and temperament. Also can you show me how that article meets WP:SIGCOV? Allblessed (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
your comment that I “lack experience and temperament” falls afoul of Wikipedia’s civility and personal-attack policies. Per WP:CIVIL (“avoid personal attacks”) and WP:AGF (“assume good faith”), we’re encouraged to critique content, not contributors. I’ve been an editor for over 21 years and remain committed to improving this article. If you have concerns about neutrality, sourcing, or structure, please point to specific passages or sources so we can address them together. Milicz (talk) 18:10, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milicz Point taken. It is kind of you to defend the nominator and to ask for specific feedback. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:49, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to address tone, and have added citations or removed claims I could not find proper citations for. Added ProQuest citations. Thank you for your suggestions Milicz (talk) 18:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. First of all, it is very clear to me that neither of the tagged criteria for speedy deletion (A7 and G11) apply. A before search, which appears to have not been performed by the nominator, shows there is at least some indication of significance. G11 requires the article to be exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedia articles (emphasis included in policy). Cleanup is required but not to the point that the article is not salvageable. Much of the content is unsourced and the references there are not great. Most are either not independent or are player profiles with one-line mentions of the subject program. Moving to draftspace will allow any interested user to build the article up to encyclopedic standards before moving it back into mainspace. Frank Anchor 13:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Olympics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:17, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:14, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - poorly sourced, promotional article written by SPA - they've also written similar topic Illinois Youth Soccer Association. Giant Snowman 10:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Suggesting that my article must be self-promotional because “someone involved in ODP” wrote it is an ad hominem circumstantial (genetic) fallacy: it rejects the content based solely on an assumed motive or origin rather than evaluating the article’s actual sourcing and neutrality. I have zero involvement in that organization and am still researching it.

For context, this article emerged directly from the research conducted to answer the community question in Chicago: “Is Illinois ODP still worth it? Does it genuinely help with college recruitment?” You’ll see that the article:

Notes ODP’s changing reputation, including that it has lost some of its earlier luster rather than presenting it as the undisputed pinnacle of development programs.

Cites independent coverage—local newspaper articles, US Youth Soccer annual reports, and academic analyses—rather than relying on press releases or self-published claims.

Maintains a neutral tone, focusing on verifiable facts about the program’s history, selection process, and outcomes.

If there are specific passages you feel remain promotional or poorly sourced, I’m happy to rewrite them or add better citations. I’m committed to meeting WP:NEUTRAL and WP:RS standards, so please let me know any additional reliable sources I should include. Milicz (talk) 15:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to U.S. Youth Soccer Olympic Development Program. This fails notability for organizations. There is simply not enough significant coverage in reliable sources to warrant an individual article for this org. Citing affiliated clubs is not independent. I mean Reddit is referenced despite our policy on Reddit. Two incidental mentions in the Chicago Tribune and sporadic mentions in the context of high school player plays soccer in regional newspapers does not cut it. --Mpen320 (talk) 17:39, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The citation to Reddit was for the "Criticisms and challenges portion" and is not used to support any of the facts or notability. Milicz (talk) 15:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. Please read WP:RSREDDIT. You should not be using it as a citation at all.--Mpen320 (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Articles about things you like are not necessarily good things. --Mpen320 (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who says I like Illinois ODP? Article itself emerged directly from the research conducted to answer the community question in Chicago: “Is Illinois ODP still worth it? Does it genuinely help with college recruitment?” As you can see (if you read it), that's an open question. Milicz (talk) 15:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I have started linking to that essay in AfDs because there is a subset of editors who think a Wikipedia article is a badge of honor and spend a lot of time trying to keep articles that should not exist. I could just as easily assume you hated ODP and wanted to create an attack page for this organization or that you are just very, very into youth soccer.--Mpen320 (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Striking my earlier !vote. Leaning either draftify or redirect to U.S. Youth Soccer Olympic Development Program; this article absolutely cannot be kept as is. Milicz You can't cite other Wikipedia articles. See WP:CIRCULAR. You need to remove all those citations you've added to other Wikipedia articles (I removed one for you and then stopped) and replace them with other reliable sources (see WP:RS). Cielquiparle (talk) 04:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No Wikipedia citations are used to support any of the points, they're only used to link to the individuals or orgs, I will remove them and simply use the appropriate tags [[ ]] Milicz (talk) 15:15, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK @Milicz...starting to look a bit better. Do you think you could work out a way to explain that Illinois ODP also fields competitive girl's soccer teams in inter-state competitions in the lead paragraph? I think that is not really coming through unless you read further down. (If you only say "program" it sounds like a purely administrative thing which makes people want to delete it.) Cielquiparle (talk) 05:33, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:The Tags on the article are too alarming, check creators contributions, there are high similarities on articles created, now for example the article title is "Illinois ODP" but the first text is "Illinois Girls Olympic Development Program", It seams to have a slight deviation from the article title to be honest. I was to suggest that instead of the creator creating similar pages with different Page names, It would have been wise to just create one or two and provide good source, good writing, formatting skills and make the writing clearer to anyone who comes across the article to understand.

Allblessed (talk) 14:16, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it's not uncommon at all for the article title to be short (see WP:CONCISE) versus the first bolded reference to the subject to be long (as examples, see Barack Obama or George H. W. Bush). Please also have a read of WP:DELETIONISNOTCLEANUP. You are right to want good sources and good writing, but AfD should not be your first port of call in addressing cleanup issues. Cielquiparle (talk) 18:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see the contributions of the user? Did you see the consistency in removing CSD tags and moving drafts back to mainspace? Allblessed (talk) 13:58, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply @Allblessed it doesn’t help to challenge my removal of the CSD tags when those tags were added without proper justification. Wikipedia’s guidelines need to be applied consistently—both when adding and removing tags. Rules aren’t one-way streets. Rather than creating disputes, which you have done on my article), it would be more productive to collaborate on refining and improving the article itself. Milicz (talk) 15:00, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Milicz There is a proper and well outlined procedure for handling allegedly improper CSD tags, and it isn't removing them yourself. When you create an article, you are connected to it more than any other contributor, whether one likes it or not. We know you support the existence of the article, you created it, and it is a conflict of interest to remove these types of tags from something you created, no matter how repetitive or improper they may seem. When you are closely connected to a subject, as it appears you are (whether you're affiliated with them, whether you are working for them, whether you just really like youth soccer in the Land of Lincoln; I don't care, it's not relevant, what is relevant is the level to which you obviously care about this), it is imperative that you operate above reproach, so as to not even give the impression that you may be acting in a biased manner. You are held to a higher standard of behavior because you created the page. You are inherently unable to view any of this completely objectively, and that goes for any author, who creates any page.

Regarding the actions of other editors, it's important to remember that each situation is evaluated independently. While it can be frustrating if you perceive another editor as not following guidelines, their actions don't justify a similar response. Our focus should always be on adhering to the established procedures for every situation. Further, they did not create a dispute, you created a dispute when you removed a CSD tag from a page you created multiple times. (Almost) any repeated editing back and forth as was clearly done here is a violation of Wikipedia:Edit warring. Wikipedia is a community of editors working to help bring knowledge to the world. The task we have is infinite. We are guardians of and contributors to one of the last stanchions of truly free knowledge, the responsibility is awesome, and it must be treated as such. Foxtrot620 (talk) 02:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reply @Foxtrot620 I completely agree with you. Two wrongs don't make a right, but no one was harmed here and you can all still delete the article. Milicz (talk) 03:40, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply @Cielquiparle I went ahead and made your suggested change and I think it works better. Now that I’ve reviewed the title, the article should be split into two sections—one for the girls’ program and one for the boys’. I’ll research the boys’ side before drafting that section. Milicz (talk) 14:14, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete: Regardless of any behavior by any editor, this organization simply does not meet the bar of notability or importance. Foxtrot620 (talk) 02:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Strong Keep Regardless of any behavior by any editor, this organization clearly meets the bar of notability and importance. It'd be great if the delete crowd could backup the lack of notability argument. Do you not like women's soccer? Do you not think it's clear this org developed players that went on to represent the USA? Is the fact that those notable players advertise that they were in this program not an indicator that those individuals thought it was notable that they took part in it? It's referenced in plenty of material, but not the material you want? 20+ citations is not enough but other articles with a "need citations" tag can stick around for decades? I'm having trouble with the merits of the delete crowd. Easy call on this one for me. 4025MG (talk) 04:02, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment above !vote is by a confirmed sockpuppetry of Milicz and has been blocked. RedPatch (talk) 13:55, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. RedPatch (talk) 11:35, 29 June 2025 (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.

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:23, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Premier League on television

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

No need for this to be a separate article from Indian Premier League. Vestrian24Bio 10:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Cricket, and India. Vestrian24Bio 10:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Indian Premier League#Broadcasting largely per WP:NOPAGE. This topic is adequately covered at the redirect target. Frank Anchor 12:25, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: First off, this was intended as a place to reinstate some history regarding the history of its broadcast rights that had been unilaterally removed by another editor without explanation, while allowing the main article to have more of a streamlined summary. In addition, this article is modeled after several similar articles in American sports, including NFL on American television and Major League Soccer on television, with the possibly of including more details about things like the production, notable personnel, etc. ViperSnake151 Talk 17:03, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Vestrian24Bio 01:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Indian Premier League#Broadcasting which covers the topic suitably. We don't need a separate page with this level of detail into the broadcasting, the summary already in IPL article is sufficient. The keep vote seems like WP:OSE. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:16, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It meets all Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion. Milicz (talk) 18:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have struck out this user for Sock puppetry. Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:38, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge to Indian Premier League#Broadcasting Unlike sports like the NFL, NBA, MLB ad NHL, the focus on this Sport is at the International Level and the IPL is not the overwhelming focus of Cricket. Article is also quite small for an article on Sports broadcasting. Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:45, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Initially even I thought that this article should be redirected, but when I looked at similar such articles of NFL and NHL, I realised that when the league will grow in years, broadcasters will change and there will be too much information to keep on the main IPL article. So we can put it all here and only summarise there. Also we can include various broadcasting/viewership records and stats here.

So I support in keeping this article here, as said above by other users aswell. Editking100 (talk) 21:26, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Editking100: see WP:OSE, Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Vestrian24Bio 03:04, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at WP:OSE as per you said, and my vote may not have followed the counterargument clause there, but my sole objective was to give information on the context (relevant here) wrt to other leagues doing the same and nothing else so I mentioned them here as a base example. I will not repeat it again, thanks for noting it to me. Editking100 (talk)

Your argument when the league will grow in years, broadcasters will change and there will be too much information to keep on the main IPL article is WP:CRYSTAL-based speculation. When and if the league grows and there becomes too much information to keep on the main IPL article, adding a spin-off article can be considered. But certainly not now. Frank Anchor 14:46, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can verify yourself, there is currently 4x or 5x more information on broadcasting here in this article as compared to the main IPL wikipage (broadcasting section). So this was my reason above when I said, I am in support for Keep here, considering we already have more information to fill a spinoff article currently citing 48 sources, which isn't included in the main page. Editking100 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:27, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I usually try to avoid WP:OSE, but in this case, it's clear this article was modeled after similar ones in American sports such as the aforementioned NFL on American television and Major League Soccer on television. According to WP:NOPAGE, when many similar notable topics exist, it is impractical to collect them into a single page, because the resulting article would be too unwieldy. With the size of this article, I think the unwieldy argument applies in this case. In addition, the article is well-sourced, so it passes WP:GNG.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:55, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous- we are not a TV directory and so supporting keeping this (or any similar article) is a violation of this. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

we are not a TV directory Agreed; WP:NOTTVGUIDE says:
An article on a broadcaster should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, format clocks, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable.
I don't see how this article on the whole is a violation of that. Left guide (talk) 18:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more discussion specifically with regard to redirecting or keeping.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Etzedek24 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:49, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Indian_Premier_League#Broadcasting. No need for separate page. RangersRus (talk) 08:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Indian_Premier_League#Broadcasting. 200.46.55.53 (talk) 22:41, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist but it currently looks like No consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to closer I don't see any keep votes advocating for anything other than WP:OSE, a no consensus close would be effectively supporting these bunch of OSE votes. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:09, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any keep votes advocating for anything other than WP:OSE. DesiMoore's keep !vote offers a rationale backed by a reasonable reading of the WP:NOPAGE notability guideline section while also asserting that it meets WP:GNG based on requisite coverage. Left guide (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: 5 votes for Redirect and 3 votes for Keep till now. RangersRus (talk) 19:25, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notability isn't in doubt here - the critical question is whether a merger is viable. In my view it is not: the article is presently at 1100 words, and most of that is reasonably encyclopedic, at least to a similar degree as comparable articles. There's likely room for expansion, with the 2008-2017 period being covered in only a couple of paragraphs. There's a few scholarly sources touching on the subject; see [2], for instance, which has a page or so of content. In sum there's too much content to be reasonably merged into the parent article, and a spinoff is appropriate. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:17, 17 July 2025 (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.

Sports-related Proposed Deletion nominations

Sports-related Categories for discussion

none at present

American football

Eagles–Falcons rivalry

AfDs for this article:

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

Last discussion was no consensus. Not many RS call this a rivalry. Minor rivalry, the Quarterbacks the rivalry is centered around are not Hall of Famers like Mahomes, Montana or Manning or Brady level, only 4 playoff meetings between the 2 teams. Rivalry isn't Divisional, nor is it centered around teams with historical dominance like rivalries that include teams like the 49ers, Cowboys, Packers, Giants, Steelers, Patriots, Broncos ETC. I can easily believe that this rivalry exists, but it just doesn't feel notable enough for its own article. I think Redirect' to List of NFL rivalries #Atlanta Falcons vs. Philadelphia Eagles where this is mentioned target per WP:CHEAP, WP:ATD, and WP:BLAR. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, American football, Georgia (U.S. state), and Pennsylvania. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the arguments I made as nominator of the 2021 AFD. The references in this article do little to pass GNG in terms of establishing a rivalry between the two teams. There is one reference with reliable, independent coverage ((this AP article), and even that, from 20 years ago, only says the teams are building a rivalry, with no follow-up suggesting a rivalry has been "built." I oppose a redirect to the NFL rivalries list (as I think the Eagles-Falcons entry in that page should be deleted as well). Frank Anchor 19:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There are a lot of references, but I'm not sure if those would justify passing WP:GNG. Most of them are articles from games, and even then, they don't add that much. NotJamestack (talk) 03:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of the sources are good for WP:GNG. This [3] wouldn't even be good for establishing a rivalry. Conyo14 (talk) 21:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baylor–Rice football rivalry

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

Series not notable enough to justify a standalone article. Incidents from the Rice band also do not indicate any sort of rivalry, as they have done this to numerous teams. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 01:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:41, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT per the sources in the article. This was also a historic Southwest Conference rivalry, due to their prominence in the conference. NotJamestack (talk) 11:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NotJamestack: The sources in the article do not indicate the series is a rivary and/or has any notable significance to both sides. All of them have been trivial mentions at best and do not go into depth of why it is a rivalry. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 20:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not temporary. The two sides met eachother annually during the days of the Southwest Conference, and are very close geographically per Cbl62, so it's pretty clear that there was a rivaly between them. NotJamestack (talk) 03:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's no Lone Star Showdown or Battle of the Brazos, but the teams met annually from 1915 to 1995, and the geographic proximity (180 miles apart) helped fuel a rivalry. On the other hand, the series was pretty lopsided in Baylor's favor at 60-17. A quick search of Newspapers.com turns up some significant coverage: (1) "Baylor-Rice rivalry develops classic proportions", 1993; (2) "Rice and Baylor Series All Even", Big Spring Daily Herald, 1950; (3) "Baylor tops Rice as rivalry ends" The Atlanta Journal, 1995; (4) "Bears rip Rice, 34-6, to close out historic 8-year-old SWC rivalry", Corpus Christi Caller-Times, 1995. Cbl62 (talk) 23:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sussex Thunder

AfDs for this article:

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

Lots of uncited claims. Multiple spots in the article with no information between several years. No information about 2002 refounding. Almost no secondary sources exist online, so the article fails WP:GNG. Very underdeveloped. Previously deleted due to copyright infringements. NotJamestack (talk) 01:35, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, American football, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lots of stuff in Newspapers.com. Here are a few: [4][5][6] ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 23:02, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think these solve the uncited claims issue I mentioned.
NotJamestack (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NotJamestack Uncited claims are not a reason to delete the article. You can just remove them yourself per WP:BURDEN. We only care about notability, not coverage or unsourced content – if you see problems like that, you're welcome to fix them yourself. The topic looks notable per WikiOriginal9's sources. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 22:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, what I meant was that they don't give enough proof of the claims in the article that are uncited to justify WP:SIGCOV, thus, the topic really should not need a standalone article.

NotJamestack (talk) 22:37, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All of these were clipped yesterday, perhaps by you? If you can add any more, then feel free but I agree with Cremastra that it doesn't pass SIGCOV. But I remain neutral 🇪🇭 Easternsahara U T C 23:06, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The 60 Yard Line

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

I believe this film fails WP:NFILM. It has not been widely reviewed outside of local sources and hasn't shown any sustained coverage or notable reviews. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Literally ALL the sources are from the Wisconsin area, where the Packers play. I can't find anything to suggest any sort of critical notice from outside the area. It was on Hulu apparently, but it would appear it didn't get much critical notice. Rotten Tomatoes has no ratings from critics, I just don't see much beyond the local area. I'd be willing to change my !vote if we had some... anything... that wasn't from the area. Oaktree b (talk) 19:02, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG per sources shown in the article. NFILM doesn't say anything about coverage being local. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- WikiOriginal-9 all of the included sources are from small town Wisconsin newspapers, with 3 written by the same author, all written in the same year in the lead-up to and around the time of release. It lacks sustained coverage and doesn't meet any of the criteria in WP:NFO. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 19:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There was an article written about the director in Omaha since he went to school there. It features some coverage of the film pg 1, pg 2. Perhaps not enough and no real critical coverage of the movie. Skynxnex (talk) 19:55, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We're not necessarily at zero here, but the sources are all written by the same writer as part of the same network of articles (so one source), a student newspaper, or are the Omaha article directly about the director. It's not quite enough to show notability. I didn't find anything else that would get it over the line. SportingFlyer T·C 21:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A few more sources [7][8] ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Even if the sources were from the Wisconsin area, the article would still pass WP:GNG. It would just need WP:SIGCOV. NotJamestack (talk) 20:44, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I think WP:ROUTINE is very applicable here NotJamestack. Small independent film premiering that covers a topic of local interest is hardly significant coverage. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - I won't vote here because I'm more skeptical about WP:SIGCOV affecting notability, and since WP:ROUTINE does not disqualify notability in sports, that's what I'm more focused on. NotJamestack (talk) 23:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Hixon, Michael (2017-11-07). "House in the middle of Lambeau Field makes for Green Bay Packer tailgates and a film". Daily Breeze. Archived from the original on 2025-07-20. Retrieved 2025-07-20.
  The article notes: "“The 60 Yard Line” is set during the 2009 football season when best friends and co-workers Ben “Zagger” Zagowski (played by Churchill) and Nick “Polano” Polano (played by Nick Greco, who was also a co-writer), stumble upon and purchase the home in the parking lot of Lambeau Field. There are two major problems: Zagowski doesn’t consult his fiancee (Kimberley Crossman) and financially they can’t afford the house, which is named “The 60 Yard Line.” But when the home becomes party central for Packers fans and some of the players, Zagowski’s relationship with his fiancee is put into jeopardy. He has to choose between the “perfect Packer’s lifestyle” and his future wife. ... After an Indiegogo campaign for seed money in 2014, Churchill began shooting in the fall of 2015. They shot 18 days in Wisconsin and some interiors shots in L.A. They waited for some snow in January 2016 and shot four more days in L.A. in February before wrapping in February of 2016."
2. Maas, Tyler (2017-09-11). "'The 60 Yard Line' makes 'Reggie's Prayer' look like 'Citizen Kan'". Milwaukee Record. Archived from the original on 2025-06-22. Retrieved 2025-07-20.
  The review notes: "Though it’s hard to imagine a harmless comedy and Packers tribute completely missing the mark, The 60 Yard Line combines well-worn (and utterly inaccurate) comedic themes, lazy Wisconsin cliches, a detestable protagonist, clunky cameos, and production values that necessitate a pre-movie “not approved by the Packers” disclaimer to forge the film equivalent of an embarrassing mid-game cutaway to a guy wearing cheesehead that’s been stretched to fill 90-minutes. ... The 60 Yard Line isn’t all bad, though. The Jetty Boys play one of the house parties, Kuhn says “shit” once, and both Cedric Yarbrough (of Reno 911! note) and Randall Park (Veep and Fresh Off The Boat) make the most of their limited time on screen. Still, none of that is enough to spare The 60 Yard Line, a story of something that “kind of sort of happened” that would’ve been better left untold."
3. Meinert, Kendra (2017-09-04). "15 fun things to look for in Packers comedy 'The 60 Yard Line'". Green Bay Press-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2025-07-20. Retrieved 2025-07-20.
  The article notes: "Filmed in Green Bay and set against the backdrop of game-day tailgating, the feature-length comedy about football super fandom tackles what happens when diehard Packers fan Ben “Zagger” Zagowski decides to use his wedding fund money to buy a house next to Lambeau so he can party on game days. ... Beloit native Ryan Churchill, who plays Zagger, co-wrote and co-produced the independent project with fellow Los Angeles actor Nick Greco, who stars as his best buddy, Nick Polano, a Chicago Bears fan."
4. Meinert, Kendra (2017-09-08). "'This is unprecedented': How Packers fans helped get 'The 60' into theaters". Green Bay Press-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2025-07-20. Retrieved 2025-07-20.
  The article notes: "A low-budget, indie project that started nearly three years ago with a $105,000 crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo.com for start-up costs and an ambitious cast wish list that once included Olivia Munn and Justin Timberlake, “The 60” has racked up plenty of yardage of its own on its journey from filming in Green Bay during the 2015 Packers season to landing in theaters last week. The hope all along was that “The 60” would somehow play in Green Bay, but for it to be in 50-plus cities is the equivalent of a cinematic Hail Mary touchdown pass. The film’s highest concentration of theaters is, not surprisingly, across Wisconsin and the Upper Midwest, including Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska. There are also scattered theaters as far away as Rochester, N.Y.; Georgetown, S.C.; and Parma, Idaho."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow The 60 Yard Line to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage. The 60 Yard Line is a film, not an event, so the notability guideline for events is not applicable. The relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (films)#General principles, which this film passes through having received significant coverage in reliable sources. Neither Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline nor Wikipedia:Notability (films) disqualify local coverage from the Green Bay, Wisconsin, area from establishing notability. However, in this case, The 60 Yard Line received significant coverage in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper based in Hermosa Beach, California. Cunard (talk) 10:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Daily Breeze seems promotional, though - there's a link to the film, and a clear local connection to the community. My concern is these sources aren't secondary, they're all too close to the actual film. SportingFlyer T·C 11:00, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not consider a Wikipedia:Convenience link to the film or a connection to the Hermosa Beach, California, or Green Bay, Wisconsin, communities to render the sources non-secondary or non-independent. Cunard (talk) 11:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE specifically notes news coverage of film premieres as falling under this notability guideline. Every single source falls within a few months of its premier, and again, are puff pieces often found promoting local stories of interest. Another WP:ROUTINE redirect is WP:DOGBITESMAN; i.e. a story that may be interesting to local readers but isn't covered with broad, sustained coverage in independent third-party sources. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage. The lead of Wikipedia:Notability (events) says:

This notability guideline for events reflects consensus reached through discussions and reinforced by established practice, and informs decisions on whether an article about past, current, and breaking news events should be written, merged, deleted or further developed.

This article is about a film, not an event. Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage says, Routine events such as sports matches, film premieres, press conferences, etc. may be better covered as part of another article, if at all. This sentence is applicable only to an article about the event Film premiere of The 60 Yard Line; it is not applicable to a film. The quote may be better covered as part of another article suggests that a film premiere should be covered in another article like the film itself. Cunard (talk) 21:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's quite a literal reading. The issue with these sources is that most film reviews are disconnected from the film - three of the four sources here are direct interviews with the people who made it, there's only one review, and it's from an independent newspaper (which is fine, but it doesn't really scream notability.) SportingFlyer T·C 23:23, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A literal reading in this case is the correct reading. If the consensus was to apply Wikipedia:Notability (events) to articles that are not about events, the guideline would say that instead of saying in the lead that it is a "notability guideline for events". I believe there is enough non-interview content in those three sources to contribute to notability under Wikipedia:Notability (films)#General principles and Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Cunard (talk) 23:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cunard, honest question because I don't know, do we have any articles covering just a movie premier. Like, Film premier of Avatar or something like that? I never read that to mean that it was talking about the notability of the movie premier, rather that news coverage on movie premiers is pretty routine, so you actually need to have some critical discussion, reviews, etc to establish notability. If we don't, then your reading of the guideline isn't correct. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 23:56, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I read that section as advising against creating articles about film premieres, sports matches, and press conferences. I am not aware of any articles about film premieres. Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Background says:

Article deletion discussions have featured a number of contentious debates about events, particularly breaking news events, that have received intense media coverage. This guideline was formed with the intention of guiding editors in interpreting the various pre-existing policies and guidelines that apply to articles about events, including WP:GNG (i.e. "a topic is presumed to have met the criteria for notability if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject") and its relationship to WP:NOT § NEWS (i.e. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of news material). By attempting to clarify the application of these rules to articles about events, this guideline reflects the community consensus regarding the handling of similarly situated articles.

This confirms that this guideline is about events, which a film is not. When the guideline was created, there was no intention to apply it to non-event articles. Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage therefore does not apply to this film. Cunard (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Cunard's interpretation here. WP:ROUTINE is saying that film premieres, even if they get significant coverage, are not notable. And that is probably why we don't have articles like Film premiere of Avatar. WP:ROUTINE even says that "Routine events such as sports matches, film premieres, press conferences, etc. may be better covered as part of another article, if at all," which implies that even though the film premiere is not notable, it may be covered "as part of another article", which most logically would be the film itself (assuming that the film meets notability guidelines). Rlendog (talk) 14:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard's sources. Rlendog (talk) 14:23, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pigskin Champions

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

I'm not finding any long-term significance for this film. I believe this fails WP:NFILM, as the only real coverage and commentary I can find on it falls within the late 1930s. A search of Newspapers.com only finds articles in 1937 and 1938. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:35, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 18:35, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails to establish as per notability WP:NOTFILM.--FreaksIn 19:06, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 19:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes GNG per the sources in the article from the Green Bay Press-Gazette and the El Paso Herald-Post. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Neither source provides critical commentary on the film and both can be read as local newspaper notices that a small film was being shown in town. Both being from 1937 shows no sustained coverage or critical commentary on the film, failing WP:GNG. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:03, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Here is one with commentary. There is more in Newspapers.com also like this and this. There are 815 hits for "Pigskin Champions" Packers. It looks like there were plans for a sequel. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - Still small town newspapers from Wisconsin promoting the Packers within a few months of the release. Nothing from the following 90 years. There's a million of these short films. I'm just not seeing any sustained critical commentary or discussion on the film. Maybe Im too used to the newspapers from the early 1900s, but these are borderline promos for a film, not critical reporting or commentary. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:33, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:GNG per WikiOriginal-9. NotJamestack (talk) 20:46, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- NotJamestack, similar to the other film, routine coverage of the magnitude of "local football team watches film about professional football" is exactly what WP:ROUTINE provides as examples of coverage that does not support notability. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:15, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Gonzo_fan2007, The only reason why this would fail WP:ROUTINE is that the film is much older. This article also has large amounts of WP:SIGCOV from the sources given by WikiOriginal-9, which on its own makes it clear that the film is notable as WP:ROUTINE in sports does not disqualify notability. NotJamestack (talk) 22:56, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, so we have six sources so far:
- August 1937, small-town newspaper, pg 13, puff piece about "movie premiere" of local gridiron football team
- August 1937, very small-town newspaper, not an article, but actually a photo and caption, last page of newspaper next to articles about someone attending a wedding and girl scout events
- August 1937, small-town newspaper, pg 14, puff piece about "movie premiere" of local gridiron football team
- September 1937, small-town newspaper, pg 12, merely stating that a movie would be playing in the local theater
- October 1937, very small-town newspaper, pg 13, stating that the movie would be playing, touches on what is in the movie
- March 1938, very small-town newspaper, last page, two sentences about the film

If the following doesn't reflect WP:ROUTINE coverage, i.e. Routine events such as sports matches, film premieres, press conferences, etc. may be better covered as part of another article, if at all. None of these articles are more than a few paragraphs (note, 1 source isn't an article at all and another is two sentences), all of them are buried at the end of small-town newspapers, nothing from the last 90 years, nothing in a national publication. I just don't see how a handful of mentions in small town newspapers is significant coverage, nor does the film meet any of the additional items in WP:NFO. There is no critical commentary (best sports movie of the 30s), no awards, no discussion on how it may have impacted the game of football, nothing. It was a short film made in the 30s, played in theaters, and then disappeared. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:10, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Walter, John (1937-08-14). "Looking up in the realms of sports". Green Bay Press-Gazette. Archived from the original on 2025-07-20. Retrieved 2025-07-20 – via Newspapers.com.
  The review notes: "All of the gags which have been described by the returning gridiron warriors are included in the short bit, which lasts about 15 minutes, but the chief humor is provided by Pete Smith's breezy comments, interspersed through the pic-ture. There is no plot, and the cast consists entirely of Pack-ers. They do things which all good Packer fans have seen them do before, but because they are Green Bay's team, it's as much fun as ever watching them do it. Particularly recommended are the slow-motion shot of Hinkle's fake punt behind the goal line, which develops into an end run, and Arnie Herber's emoting after he misses a 60-yard forward passing target."
2. "Pigskin Champions". Motion Picture Herald. Vol. 128, no. 13. 1937-09-25. p. 55. Retrieved 2025-07-20 – via Internet Archive.
  The review provides 111 words of coverage about the subject. The review notes: "The dawn of another football season is the provocation that has diverted the talents of Pete Smith from the tennis and golf fare so much in evidence this summer. The material he has gathered to illustrate the finer points of the pigskin game, as of last season's close, is the best obtainable. The Green Bay Packers, champion professional outfit, to the accompaniment of Smith's running narrative, dig deep into their bag of tricks coming out with double spinners, hidden ball plays, punts to the coffin corner and forward passes mention chiefly because of their length and accuracy. As usual in the "special-ties," comedy plays a major role. Running time, 11 minutes."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Pigskin Champions to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 10:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not temporary says: "Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of 'significant coverage' in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage."
WP:ROUTINE redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage. Pigskin Champions is a film, not an event, so the notability guideline for events is not applicable. The relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (films)#General principles, which this film passes through having received significant coverage in reliable sources. Neither Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline nor Wikipedia:Notability (films) disqualify "small-town newspapers" from establishing notability. However, I consider Green Bay Press-Gazette and the Motion Picture Herald to be larger than "small-town newspapers". Cunard (talk) 10:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE specifically notes news coverage of film premieres as falling under this notability guideline. Notability is definitely not temporary, but there needs to be some sustained coverage, otherwise it again is just "a movie premiered that is of local interest". All of these sources so far are exactly that: puff pieces in the back of the newspaper about an item of local interest. The Green Bay Press-Gazette today is definitely larger, but in the 1930s it was something like the 8th most read newspaper in Wisconsin, covering a town of less than 40,000 people. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:59, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ROUTINE redirects to Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage. The lead of Wikipedia:Notability (events) says:

This notability guideline for events reflects consensus reached through discussions and reinforced by established practice, and informs decisions on whether an article about past, current, and breaking news events should be written, merged, deleted or further developed.

This article is about a film, not an event. Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage says, Routine events such as sports matches, film premieres, press conferences, etc. may be better covered as part of another article, if at all. This sentence is applicable only to an article about the event Film premiere of Pigskin Champions; it is not applicable to a film. The quote may be better covered as part of another article suggests that film premieres should be covered in another article like the film itself.

I consider significant coverage in the 8th most read newspaper in Wisconsin, covering a town of less than 40,000 people to contribute to establishing notability. Cunard (talk) 21:55, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

None

Files proposed for deletion

None

Templates for deletion

None

Categories

None

Baseball

Articles for deletion

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Do not comment on these articles here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, the remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.

Templates for discussion

Categories for discussion

Requested moves

Basketball

Hunter Greene (basketball)

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

Non notable former college basketball player. He didn't do anything particularly notable in college and did not play in the pros. Also the sourcing is from the team media guide, the college newspaper and a few minor mentions in team notes from the local paper. Prod was removed in 2017 and article creator claimed he would look for better sources.. it's been eight years and he hasn't found any. Spanneraol (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Spanneraol (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:19, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep don't know if it's quite accurate to say he didn't do anything notable in college, considering all the records he set. I'm naturally hesitant to keep an article just on the basis of college sports performance, but the amount of in-depth press coverage (both during his Lobos tenure and afterwards, as recently as 2022) makes me believe subject passes WP:GNG. I've added sources to the article if anyone wants to take a look. Zzz plant (talk) 18:37, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Haven't gotten the chance to look at all of them but references 1 and 13 (as they appear in the article) have the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 00:31, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know.. they all seem like local issue stories from the hometown newspaper to me. Spanneraol (talk) 01:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Albuquerque Journal is the biggest newspaper in NM, and national coverage isn't a req for WP:N. I just added clippings for the most obvious WP:SIGCOV, but there's a lot of name-checking in retrospective analysis. Just to cherry-pick a few, in 1995 he's described as "one of UNM's most accomplished men's basketball players ever" and in 2024, a "Lobo legend" and "one of the best Lobos in the program's history." Zzz plant (talk) 01:38, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Local coverage is permitted for sportspeople unless it is a WP:YOUNGATH situation, which this isn't. Let'srun (talk) 17:17, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm biased as the creator of the article, though I have now added further cites. He was discussed as one of the best overall Lobo players ever, and certainly of the 1980s (see new cite addition at footnote 4), and he is well-known in Albuquerque as a businessman and radio personality. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 20:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jasmine Kondrakiewicz

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

Doesn't appear to pass WP:GNG as a former college basketball player and now assistant coach. References are mostly passing with other players or statistical in nature. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 17:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Basketball, and Wisconsin. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 17:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – meets WP:GNG. SIGCOV can be found in her Google News search, especially [9]. – Ike Lek (talk) 20:49, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject appears to have WP:SIGCOV in [[10]], [[11]], and [[12]]. I'd say the WP:GNG is met here. Let'srun (talk) 22:05, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per these [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19] Anxioustoavoid (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, SIGCOV including Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, National Collegiate Athletic Association, NBC, Spectrum News SDGB1217 (talk) 10:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chaska Hawks Girls Basketball

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

Article on a high school basketball team. GPL93 (talk) 17:20, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Basketball, and Minnesota. GPL93 (talk) 17:20, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heat–Pacers rivalry

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

Looks like a ~~completely made up or~~ non notable rivalry based on these teams looking like "the best in the Eastern Conference" for 3 straight years in which Miami won all 3. Non Divisional, basically based on playoffs. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NRIVALRY. Delete or find an appropriate Redirect if it is notable enough for this. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, Florida, and Indiana. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment [20],[21],[22],[23],[24], [25]. It's not entirely cruft. Conyo14 (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Conyo14 I couldn't find it at 2 because I have apparently reached my free article limit despite not reading previously at all, I believe it is there. I would argue these articles basically talk about it when it being hyped as a heating up rivalry. There have been many sports rivalries that have worn down when they were regarded as future top rivalries. And these are basically articles around the time of the rivalry. I will let every editor make up their mind nonetheless. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Something that helps is disabling JavaScript, but if it's extra pay-walled, perhaps someone else can provide a link. However, I will remain neutral on this topic, only providing links if I find them. Conyo14 (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't understand the statement in the nomination "Non Divisional, entirely based on playoffs." Notable rivalries can be based primarily or entirely on playoffs. One of the most notable rivalries in American sports has been the Yankees-Dodgers from the 1941 to the 1981 before they ever met in the regular season, and were never in the same division, let alone the same league. Another example, this time from basketball, is Celtics-Lakers. And this is clearly not "completely made up" given Conyo's sources. Unless there is a valid deletion rationale, I would say procedural keep. Rlendog (talk) 19:33, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rlendog Honestly, yeah. It was bad wording by me that I got from other completely made up rivalries. Servite et contribuere (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sports "rivalry" articles are often flooded with WP:ROUTINE match coverage. The main notability guideline's event section WP:SBST addresses this by saying:
Even a large number of news reports that provide no critical analysis of the event is not considered significant coverage.
The guideline also says in WP:WHYN:
We require the existence of at least one secondary source so that the article can comply with Wikipedia:No original research's requirement that all articles be based on secondary sources.
So, can anyone identify one to three WP:SECONDARY independent reliable sources to establish this as a notable recurring event per the guideline requirement? Left guide (talk) 22:11, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Categories

for occasional archiving

Bodybuilding

Boxing

Articles for deletion

Desiré Ollo

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

Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The only reference is a database and I couldn't find secondary sourcing elsewhere. A redirect to Gabon at the 1984 Summer Olympics may be a suitable WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, Olympics, and Africa. Let'srun (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Gabon at the 1984 Summer Olympics#Boxing – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 15:18, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khalid Al-Karkhi

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

No SIGCOV found. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, Olympics, and Iraq. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Similar to WP:Articles for deletion/David Gillow, one of the cited sources seems to be a picture of a newspaper, but from a Facebook page. We have yet to exactly decipher where the newspaper came from. Until then, per WP:V, I can't count it since we don't know what newspaper this is about. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 21:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Incredibly obvious notability. We have SIGCOV here, a picture of an old newspaper story included in a post by the national Olympic academy (the Olympic academy's text indicates notability as well, e.g. "famous in the world of boxing / He fulfilled the dreams of the leaders of the Iraqi sports movement / he has been dubbed the "Golden Champion" for winning the only gold medal in boxing at the Arab Tournament, in which all Arab countries participated / When he retired from boxing, he never strayed far from the boxing atmosphere, remaining attached to its champions, especially those within the army national team, where he became the team's president for many years / to date, no boxer has occupied his position in his weight class / his name flies high among the flags of immortal champions."). There's a big difference here from Gillow, as we can actually read the full text and know it to be SIGCOV. Among other things, it notes he never lost at the national championships and was a well-known national figure nicknamed the "Golden Champion". Other modern sources such as this name him as one of the "sports stars" of his era. The odds of a nationally-known figure and famed "champion" of Iraqi sports remembered decades after his career – someone we've already demonstrated to have one piece of SIGCOV – not having any further coverage during his career (we have not checked any Iraqi archives) is 0%. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:21, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It’s still not technically an independent source unless we find that newspaper directly and cite it directly. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 01:01, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A newspaper doesn't become non-independent if its republished by an Olympic committee. WP:NEXIST. And do you seriously think there would be no further coverage in Iraq of their famous "Golden Champion" who never lost a fight in the country, won every national championship he competed for, and is remembered today as an "immortal champion" who "fulfilled the dreams of the leaders of Iraqi sports"? That would be a ludicrous assumption! Its obvious he's notable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
no direct source of the paper itself, no NEXIST. If you can’t find the actual paper, you can’t cite it. That’s bordering on Original research. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 02:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's not how it works. If we have evidence that sources exist, and here it is incredibly strong evidence, then that is sufficient to keep. I don't see how information from a newspaper is possibly "original research" at all. Do you have reason to assume the Olympic organization would fabricate newspaper stories on him? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:16, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have reason to believe that the Olympic org as a non-indepnedent source would overblow the amount of coverage. Where is the actual direct citation of that specific newspaper? All I am asking for. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 12:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BeanieFan11. Nixleovel (He/They) (Talk • Contribs) 05:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per BeanieFan11. Svartner (talk) 12:22, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per @BeanieFan11. Also is there some sort of contest going on to see who can AFD nominate the most sportspeople because there seems to be a lot of late and many have quickly been proven to be ludicrous nominations the subjects of which have had loads of SIGCOV and were clearly notable? Just asking because if there's a prize I might join in! Anxioustoavoid (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Piling on at this point. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 16:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Even though there is admitted piling on, I can't see how we are meeting WP:SPORTCRIT here, which says that All sports biographies, including those of subjects meeting any criteria listed below, must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. That is a specific subject notability requirement that one such source be on the page, and not just presumed to exist. If we can find actual sources, I'll revisit this, but as things stand, it has to be a delete per P&G. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:51, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stamatios Kolethras

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

Declined prod. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. Eliminated in first round. LibStar (talk) 02:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Boxing, Olympics, and Greece. LibStar (talk) 02:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been helpful if you had made note of his Greek Wikipedia page. el:Μάκης Κολέθρας It isn't well sourced, but it gives a lot of information helpful to finding sources, like the name he is more commonly referred to by. His wikidata seems messed up.

Ike Lek (talk) 03:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have now merged the Wikidata items (Q16512439 and Q20029381). They will likely (definitely) need cleaning up. Ike Lek (talk) 04:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Per Ike Lek sources. Looks enough WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 08:20, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but recommending a draftification for additional improvement - I think we have the sources on this one. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 01:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:59, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Categories

Cricket

Articles for deletion

Hayley Penhall

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

Does not meet GNG and SNG Sport Uncle Bash007 (talk) 22:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. I couldn't find any sources at all after searching Google news, JSTOR, Google Books, Google scholar and Google newspapers. Given that the subject has gained their supposed notability in the 21st century, it seems strange that there aren't any sources on them. This obviously fails GNG and RS 🇪🇭 Easternsahara U T C 23:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Cricket, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 23:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no mentions of subject in g-news, newspapers.com, or PressReader. I can barely find reliable sources about the team she plays for or the league they're in. Zzz plant (talk) 03:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of WP:SIGCOV. Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uganda cricket team in Bermuda in 2009

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

No evidence this "tour" (of 1 match) between 2 minor teams passes WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, Cricket, Uganda, and Caribbean. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2009–10 ICC Intercontinental Shield#2009 season, which has the same information. Geschichte (talk) 21:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Bermuda Smash Invitational

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

No evidence these season articles meet WP:GNG, as this is just a local cricket tournament with not very much coverage. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:54, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Sports, Cricket, and Caribbean. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:54, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan Champions Cricket League

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

No evidence this event passes WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Cricket, and Pakistan. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: not enough WP:SIGCOV on independent reliable sources other than WP:ROUTINE coverage. Fails WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 16:31, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 16:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kalinchowk Cricket Ground

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

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. In fact, very little coverage of any sort was found. Was a contested redirect with zero improvement (adding a source which doesn't mention the subject is not an improvement). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:29, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cricket-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:29, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no sources with WP:SIGCOV to pass WP:GNG. Vestrian24Bio 16:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect add a short paragraph to Surkhet District about the ground and associated cricket teams, and then redirect this article there. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No clear consensus on an outcome yet. For what it's worth, the nominator's contested redirect was pointed to Karnali Province cricket team.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note on relister's comment I personally oppose redirect to Karnali Province cricket team, as both them and Karnali Yaks (who don't have a separate article) play there, and so it would be a WP:SURPRISE to redirect there IMO. Which is why I suggested a more general article that could mention both teams. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:14, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we have two different suggested redirect target articles here. We need to get to a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:50, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge candidates

Proposed deletion candidates

Cue sports

Cycling

Mehari Okubamicael

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

Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The only references here or on the corresponding wikis are databases and a search elsewhere didn't come up with anything. Let'srun (talk) 20:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Olympics, and Ethiopia. Let'srun (talk) 20:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per lack of a clear redirect target. Svartner (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Bana

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

Declined prod. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. The added source is a 1 line mention and not SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 00:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Olympics, and Cameroon. LibStar (talk) 00:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Potential Source – He is mentioned in the first paragraph of this article, but the rest seems to be paywalled [26]. Similar situation with this one [27]. – Ike Lek (talk) 01:18, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cameroon at the 1980 Summer Olympics#Cycling – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 02:52, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Cameroon at the 1980 Summer Olympics#Cycling: Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. The two sources provided in this discussion appear to be passing mentions, and a search on the internet archive didn't reveal anything. Let'srun (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Were you actually able to access the full sources, or are you just assuming because of the first paragraphs? Ike Lek (talk) 20:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Gillow

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

Unable to find SIGCOV through google searches under both name and "galloping" nickname. The newspapers on the back of his personal website, since I can't find the name of the newspaper, I can't WP:VERIFY them. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 15:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Olympics, and Zimbabwe. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 15:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per WP:NEXIST. The background of his website is literally clips of newspaper features on him. That you can't find them by searching Google proves that you cannot find all existing SIGCOV on the internet and there is often offline things to find. There is likely much more that exists, but knowing that there were at least four newspaper features on him per his pictures on his website is sufficient. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: While the subject's personal website does include newspaper clippings, we have no indication beyond the headlines what the articles are about or how much coverage was provided, thus WP:NEXIST is not applicable. As such, the WP:GNG is not met here with any WP:SIGCOV here or elsewhere. Let'srun (talk) 17:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- He's literally in the titles of the articles and they are several columns long! That clearly indicates SIGCOV. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Not necessarily. It could be that the articles only mention Gillow only for a couple of sentences before covering other topics. We can't say for sure one way or the other. Let'srun (talk) 18:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  When there is large pictures of him, he is in the title, and the first sentences are about him, assuming that it is not SIGCOV is completely ridiculous and implausible. We can use common sense. The chances that there is not SIGCOV of him is essentially nil. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Verifiability is a core policy of Wikipedia. The sources may exist, but we have not verified them yet. Until we can verify, we can't do anything yet. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The article is completely verifiable. We do not need to verify the specific newspaper of the SIGCOV that we know with 99.99% certainty is SIGCOV to allow for the article to be kept; deleting an article when we have SIGCOV because "well, we don't have the specific newspaper that SIGCOV was published in at the moment" is utterly ludicrous. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  If we cannot access the source, read it, and if we cannot verify that it is real and exists, we DON'T have the SIGCOV. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  It is obvious that the sources are real and that they cover him in detail... BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:41, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  No it's not. They're from his own website. We need to verify where these actually came from. Until then, either draftify or delete. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Moreover, you're citing the subject himself. How do we know that the sources aren't just edited? Unless we can find the original paper in Zimbabwe, or plausibly Australia because the website looks like a com.au website, We need to be able to verify that the sources are actually real. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:43, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  You seriously expect an Olympian to fabricate 1970s newspapers on himself to put on his website? That is completely implausible. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  We can't cite primary sources on Wikipedia for the purposes of establish notability. We're not a research project the same way a high school, college or institution is. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:46, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  You actually can cite primary sources, and the newspapers aren't those. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  We can't cite newspapers if we don't know where they came from, who wrote them, etc. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Except we can. We don't need to know the author for a newspaper to be usable. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  We don't even know which newspaper Gillow even appeared in. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  WP:NOCOMMON. Let'srun (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Wikipedia has many policies or what many consider "rules". Instead of following every rule, it is acceptable to use common sense as you go about editing. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:31, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  And I find it quite frankly insulting for any editor to use it in AfD. Zimbabwe is not the United States, and it is not clear that the provided screenshots provide significant, independent coverage of the subject. Let'srun (talk) 18:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  The one with the photo has a sub-sub-headline that suggests that the article is more overall coverage of the event, which would be common for sports coverage. Here's an example, where the person in the title an in the accompanying photograph gets only four sentences, or about 1/4th of the article. Even if we accept that these are images of real newspapers, we do not know what papers they are, so we don't know if they are reliable sources, nor if they are multiple sources or but a single source. We cannot cite the newspapers because we don't know what they say beyond the headlines (at the resolution of the image, it would be at best a guess), and headlines are not reliable sources even in reliable source newspapers, so there is nothing to cite, and we wouldn't know what source to attribute even if we did. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Good point re: WP:HEADLINES being unreliable and not establishing WP:SIGCOV. Even if we could verify with certainty the authenticity of the headlines—which we cannot—that would be insufficient. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:25, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Headline content itself isn’t, is what policy says: but if we are asked to make a logical assumption on the article content based on the headline, the common sense assumption should be obvious. Kingsif (talk) 11:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  It's a big leap from these grainy, unauthenticated photos of 2–4 newspaper clippings to "SIGCOV definitely exists". --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  It's not a logical assumption if the only image that exists of the newspaper clippings is on a non-independent source, and all potential sources that we can search at least at the moment turn up nothing. We can't verify that, at least not yet, and to keep this kind of material online can potentially risk us spreading hoaxes at the most extreme interpretation Especially if he is living, then BLP would apply too (which we still are unsure of). I feel compelled to remind you that verifiability is one of the three core content policies, alongside RS and NOR, and that verification from a personal site, let alone one that isn't even online anymore and only accessible from the internet archive, is like saying "I have a billion dollars, source is trust me bro plz". InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:06, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  What are you on about mate? The known existence of these sources is being used to demonstrate notability, that's all we have to determine, if sources exist - we're not putting statements we can't verify into the article and nobody has suggested that. Just because you can't search to save your life doesn't make everything others turn up 'trust me bro plz'. Kingsif (talk) 22:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The known existence of these sources itself is in question. If we can't verify that these even exist by referring to the original paper, nor have any of our paper searches yet turned up the exact headline, on top of the lack of a name for the newspaper, and all we have to go on is a grainy photograph from a no-longer-online website, we can't even verify that the sources which are supposedly demonstrating notability exist, or are being used out of context. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:25, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep NEXIST - we know sources exist, even if we can't access them. I'd agree with Beanie that to see an article with a headline mentioning the subject's name and first sentences discussing him, and assert that the article could just contain a passing mention is nothing more than wilful lack of common sense. Kingsif (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I concur with Kingsif's reasoning for supporting BeanieFan11. Source verifiability does not mean that a source has to be able to be verified by a specific person or group of people, but that it is indeed possible for someone to verify the existence and quality of the source. For instance, if a database listed the last surviving copies of a referenced print resource to be in a local library in rural Kazakhstan, the source cannot be assumed to be unverifiable just because no one in an AfD discussion is willing to buy a flight to Kazakhstan to check. – Ike Lek (talk) 22:11, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per reasonings above. Seacactus 13 (talk) 13:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the idea of a potential source only being mentioned on a subject's personal or non-RS website and so far not being locatable otherwise...I get the gut feeling that this might be best suited for a VPP discussion. I might start that if I feel like it. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 15:01, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I've started it at WP:VPP. Feel free to comment InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:NEXIST points to Wikipedia:Published, which states (emphasis included in the original):
All reliable sources must be both published and accessible to at least some people, according to definitions in the relevant policies and guidelines. Sources that are not published (e.g., something someone said to you personally) or not accessible (e.g., the only remaining copy of the book is locked in a vault, with no one allowed to read it) are never acceptable as sources on Wikipedia.
A source that no one is able to locate, whose existence and content cannot be verified by any editor cannot be used. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:48, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Accessible to at least some people? Well, that is the case here, given that someone put them online (to do so, it must have been accessible). The reason no editor has located them aside from the website listing them is because no editor has checked Zimbabwean newspaper archives, where the coverage is. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:53, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Low res photos of newspaper clippings on a website that is non-independent or not otherwise considered a reliable source are insufficient. It is not accessible if no editor is able to locate to confirm their existence and contents. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:07, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The link you point to does not say we need an editor right now to verify all the citation details, only that it needs to be accessible to someone, which it is. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Someone independent of the article subject and independent of the website, which is not a reliable source. Wikipedia:Published#Accessible goes on to say A source is considered accessible if it is available to the public to review in some manner and provides further discussion and definition. Perhaps one of the WikiProjects tagged on Talk:David Gillow or Wikipedia:Reference desk can help identify sources to establish SIGCOV and improve the article. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:36, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  I tried to check but failed to find any online archives which I have access to for Zimbabwean archives. Plus, if his personal website is hosted in Australia, why not search Australian archives like we did, and that also turned up no results? InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 19:20, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  His career appears to have taken place in Zimbabwe, while it seems he later moved to Australia. The newspapers are likely Zimbabwean, and thus would be found in offline Zimbabwean archives. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:23, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Regardless, the fact that a self-published, promotional source mentions or shows snippets of what might be such sources is not sufficient on its own to satisfy NEXIST. A low-quality image of an unidentifiable newspaper clipping on a personal website falls short of your WP:ONUS. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 21:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Coverage clearly exists. This seems to be a classic case of systematic bias because the coverage seems to have occurred in print media in a country that does not have a well developed online media archive. Number 5 7 20:34, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RGW InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pointing out systematic bias that comes from a disregard for print media is not WP:RGW. Ike Lek (talk) 22:21, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But relying on inaccessible, unauthenticated sources whose existence is only suggested by a single unusable source to correct for systematic bias is RGW. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 21:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: to the 1980 Summer Olympics. I feel like a broken record saying that, we see too many of these permastubs in wiki lately. Oaktree b (talk) 00:44, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Parra

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

Fails WP:GNG. I was unable to find any significant coverage about him. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Colombia. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The French wiki article has many sources, but they're all race listings or database listings, where Parra is only mentioned in passing. German wiki has no sources... I can't find any in my search. Appears to have won some races, but there are no extensive sources about this, other than database listings. Oaktree b (talk) 20:16, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first FR wiki source talks about his win, but it repeats Tweets and is archived, on a site that translates as CyclingInColumbia, I'm going to assume it's not a RS. It's the only one that isn't a database listing regardless, so still not enough sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 20:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Found several sources in Spanish if you would like to review them. Seacactus 13 (talk) 15:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cycling-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Found a good number of sources in Spanish, I'm sure there are more as well. 1 2 3 4 5. Also a Continental champion. Seacactus 13 (talk) 15:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per Seacactus 13. Svartner (talk) 00:50, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources from Seacactus 13. – Ike Lek (talk) 05:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's pretty clear this guy is notable, though the article does a pretty poor job of showing it. Allan Nonymous (talk) 15:00, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cycling Proposed deletions

Deletion Review

For American football, see WikiProject Deletion sorting/American football

Primary listing for deletion nominations is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Nominations for deletion and page moves. Items may be cross-listed here to allow automated archiving. (as of 2007-11-22)

Football

Reece James (disambiguation)

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

Per WP:2D; there is only one other main listing on this page. Replace DAB link with hatnote to born 1993 on PT page. Spike 'em (talk) 07:57, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:53, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Talk:Reece James#Requested move 14 July 2025 which specifically referenced keeping the dab page. Giant Snowman 17:39, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Football, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:47, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per GiantSnowman. Svartner (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tetsuya Yamaoka

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

Good faith deprod by @Absurdum4242: with the reasoning that with nearly 50 games, there would be sources out there. There are only primary sources on the Japanese Wikipedia, and I only found passing mentions in [28] [29] . RossEvans19 (talk) 13:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Japan. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gregg Schroeder

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The only reference is primary to the league the subject participated in and all I could find elsewhere was a couple of sentences at [[30]], but it isn't enough to meet the notability guidelines in my opinion. Let'srun (talk) 02:22, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, California, and North Carolina. Let'srun (talk) 02:22, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Caparelli

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV from reliable secondary sources. The current sources are all primary to clubs the subject played for and all I could find elsewhere was a single paragraph of coverage at [[31]]. Let'srun (talk) 02:15, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Argentina, Arizona, California, Tennessee, and Washington. Let'srun (talk) 02:15, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 02:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SIGCOV so fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ramón Arriaga

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

I am struggling to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this Mexican footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. JTtheOG (talk) 21:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 22:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails in GNG, no profile in WorldFootball. RossEvans19 (talk) 14:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cuauhtémoc Domínguez

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

I am struggling to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this Mexican footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 21:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. JTtheOG (talk) 21:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Even though he played a few seasons for Atlante, a club that is expected to have good coverage, I couldn't find anything about him. Svartner (talk) 22:06, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:46, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1966–67 Divizia C

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

Was restored from a redirect as a result of an RFD discussion (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 14#1966–67 Divizia C). The requestor used, as part of their basis for restoring the article, "The article cited at least three reliable sources, including Sportul, the national sports newspaper of the time, which is widely recognized as a dependable reference for historical football data. In line with policies such as WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD, I believe the article should be restored, as it presents verifiable, factual information that is useful to readers, even if it doesn't meet GNG strictly in terms of broad media coverage. (italics mine) " The issue is that of those 3 sources, one is simply a db page, and the two others appear to be simple mentions. The articles referenced appear to be about Division B, and mention the promotions from Division C. Neither are in-depth coverage. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Romania. Shellwood (talk) 17:23, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I’d like to respectfully disagree with the deletion, as I believe the article qualifies for restoration under WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD.

The sources cited do not merely mention promotions in passing — they specifically refer to the 1966–67 Divizia C season as having just concluded, summarizing its outcome. This is not a trivial or incidental mention, but direct coverage of the season’s results, published at the time in Sportul, a daily newspaper, and Fotbal, a weekly magazine — both recognized Romanian sports publications.

While the article is minimal, it provides verifiable, factual information backed by contemporary sources. Deleting it removes content that is reliably sourced and pertains to a specific, completed national competition.

Wikipedia recognizes that many articles start as stubs — short but useful entries that provide verifiable information. There is no deadline for completeness; articles can and should be expanded over time. Deleting an article solely because it is brief or incomplete contradicts Wikipedia’s nature as a work in progress.

Restoration would allow for future development, but even in its current state, the article contains non-trivial, source-backed content that meets inclusion standards under existing policies. --Florin (talk) 18:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's completely meaningless to single out the 1966–67 season among 50 individual seasons of this league. Geschichte (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The redirect and the rationale for it was shocking, considering that we rarely have such a clear showing that a league passes WP:GNG with printed non-English journalism sources from almost 60 years ago already in the article. SportingFlyer T·C 19:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article looks good. It has three sources, including from the most popular Romanian newspaper of that time. It is hard to find a better source for a third division season that took place 50 years ago. Sebi1990TheSecond (talk)
Keep – Per above. Svartner (talk) 21:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - sorry, but none of the current sourcing is even close to significant coverage.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two sources point to sports publications from the time (1967) and one to a specialized website. This is the type of coverage expected for a competition edition. Svartner (talk) 22:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And that does not satisfy WP:SIGCOV. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it easily satisfies WP:SIGCOV, especially for a competition. A 1967 magazine had an almost full page spread dedicated to the results of a third division league - I'm sure if we found other copies of that magazine there would be additional coverage there. The other magazine in the article almost had a full page dedicated to every single game played in that division. They had correspondents at each game! It's crystal clear this competition was significantly covered by the Romanian media. SportingFlyer T·C 19:47, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The 1966–67 season was extensively convered by the Sportul newspaper, with results published each week and the final table after the seasons's conclusions. If needed, we can provide sources that list some of the scores to prove the notability. mihai.zamfir30 16:14, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:40, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per arguments above which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep As always, I'd like to see more prose, however there appears to be enough coverage. Govvy (talk) 20:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Efetobo Aror

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

Aror is still a collegiate athlete who made a single brief appearance in USL Championship and while he was selected in the first round of the MLS Draft, he did not sign. Aror may eventually warrant an article, but WP:TOOSOON appears relevant, and it would've been better if it were just a draft. Raskuly (talk) 17:13, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Arizona, Georgia (U.S. state), and Oregon. Raskuly (talk) 17:13, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 21:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Arndt

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

Arndt seems most notable for his collegiate career, such as being named ISAA Goalkeeper of the Year and having his kit number retired by his college team. Arndt's career after that is very non-notable. WP:GNG Raskuly (talk) 17:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Maryland, and South Carolina. Raskuly (talk) 17:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to ISAA Goalkeeper of the Year#Men's Goalkeeper of the Year – As WP:ATD. But I imagine there must be something about him in the local newspapers. Svartner (talk) 21:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As I said. Svartner (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Subject appears to have some WP:SIGCOV in [[32]] and [[33]]. This subject meets the WP:GNG, IMO. Let'srun (talk) 21:32, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The first is about Arndt trying to sign with a German club, which did not pan out. Americans playing in Europe was much less common then, so it makes sense that he was mentioned at least once. The second is about Arndt's kit number being retired for his college team, which I mentioned above. Arndt was a very successful collegiate athlete for the Gamecocks, so it also makes sense that this happened, but he did not have much of a professional playing career. Both of these articles are about something unusual about Arndt's career, but are these really approaching WP:SIGCOV? Raskuly (talk) 17:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:40, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Max Briggs

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

Long-time stub of a former footballer without significant coverage and career information. Regarding secondary sources, I found a passing mention on Norwich Evening News, but I don't know how reliable the website is. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:37, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 12:37, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: cut content from article history: "He made 170 appearances for the club (scoring twice) before moving to Oxford United in 1974, where he spent the last three seasons of his career" Geschichte (talk) 15:49, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some coverage: 1 2 3. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first was good, the third also confirms most of the cut content. Geschichte (talk) 19:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The third source is also a brief mention about his transfer to Oxford United. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 06:35, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:40, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:44, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Park Sang-hyeok (footballer, born 2002)

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

Doesn't appear to pass WP:NATHLETE. I prod'd and creator deprod'd. They added a few sources but they're only passing mentions. Also noting this article isn't the only one they've created with this issue; feel like NATHLETE needs to be read and adhered to closer in general. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Korea, and South Korea. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:50, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing a discussion from my talk page. User talk:grapesurgeon#Related to Park Sang-hyeok. @Issue0501: please read WP:NATHLETE more carefully; statistics don't count towards proof of notability. You need news articles that discuss him in depth beyond just passing mentions of his name. And please don't get so angry at me; we're not enemies, we're working together to build an encyclopedia. I'm just following Wikipedia policy. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 06:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added an article with some reference to his playstyle. Here's an article that goes into more detail about him. Issue0501 (talk) 06:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And you weren't angry? How can you be sure that you were angry? Issue0501 (talk) 06:29, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OHMYNEWS is considered an unreliable source because it's WP:UGC. Also I wasn't angry? Let's just focus on the content, strange counteraccusation grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 06:35, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How can you be so sure that this is a strange rebuttal? You are only focusing on the content. If you can't trust Korean media articles, then how can you understand the numerous domestic media articles on Japanese athletes? If you can't trust statistical sites and articles, then it's right to just delete them. Issue0501 (talk) 06:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What? I do trust Korean media articles, I use them in my own writings all the time. I already explained to you what the issues are. You need to have reliable sources (in any language) that discuss him in depth. Statistics aren't enough.

When I said "strange counteraccusation", I meant that it was strange you were saying I was angry at you. I hadn't really said anything that made it seem like I was angry at you?

Also, to others reading, noting that Issue0501 blanked the article after making that comment. I undid the blanking; articles in article space shouldn't be blank. Also, the discussion is still ongoing so should wait until this discussion concludes. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 06:53, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Stop here and delete it quickly. This document can't exist anyway. Issue0501 (talk) 06:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:06, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - young player with nearly 100 appearances (and ongoing career) in top Korean professional league. Has a WP:BEFORE been done for sources in Korean? Giant Snowman 19:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guerreiros do Almirante

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

CR Vasco da Gama's organized/Ultra fan club, which isn't even the most important in the club (Força Jovem). The article was created in 2014 and since then no independent news about them can be found. Svartner (talk) 02:49, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football, and Brazil. Svartner (talk) 02:49, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to CR Vasco da Gama#Supporters as possible search term. Giant Snowman 19:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to CR Vasco da Gama#Supporters per GiantSnowman. Standalone pages of football ultras are normally non-notable. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 06:32, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladeshi Football Ultras

AfDs for this article:

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

As pointed out in the first AfD a year ago, the article has a number of conflicts of interest, with accusations of paid interviews being used as fake sources, besides going beyond the scope of the project. Svartner (talk) 21:05, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Bangladesh. Svartner (talk) 21:05, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @আফতাবুজ্জামান: to help with the analysis again if possible. Svartner (talk) 21:07, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and SALT - per last AFD. Giant Snowman 19:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adriel Ochoa

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

I am struggling to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 20:49, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Estonia, and Mexico. JTtheOG (talk) 20:49, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find anything either. Rainsage (talk) 23:46, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per lack of WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 21:12, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – non-notable football player. Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:08, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Quintero

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

The closest thing I found to WP:SIGCOV for this footballer was this short piece. JTtheOG (talk) 20:10, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. JTtheOG (talk) 20:10, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – non-notable football player. Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:09, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

José Manica

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

I am struggling to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this Mexican footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 19:52, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Mexico. JTtheOG (talk) 19:52, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – non-notable football player. Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:10, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matías Montero

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

I am struggling to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this Argentine footballer. JTtheOG (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Argentina, and Mexico. JTtheOG (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2011 FIFA U-17 World Cup squads#Argentina – As WP:ATD. Participating in the 2011 U17 World Cup was his most significant achievement. I couldn't find anything about him even on the BDFA. Svartner (talk) 20:32, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2011 FIFA U-17 World Cup squads#Argentina per Svartner's BEFORE. RossEvans19 (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. Giant Snowman 19:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2011 FIFA U-17 World Cup squads#Argentina per the above. Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dario Šmitran

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

Appears to have only had a handful of appearances in the Slovenian league, and the closest thing I could find to sigcov was this. Geschichte (talk) 14:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovenia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:03, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--A09|(talk) 15:44, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michał Pytkowski

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

Apparently played once for Widzew Łódź, never in the second tier and mostly on the third and fourth tier. The closest things I could find to sigcov were this and this (which isn't exactly close). Interview. Geschichte (talk) 14:32, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Poland. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:21, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails NBIO, catalogue-level entry based on few datapoints, Wikidata entry will suffice. Note - no pl wiki article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:32, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:05, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Knud Andersen (footballer, born 1900)

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

This article a just long-time stub without any significant improvement for 18 years that may be only supported by his primary profiles. Despite being the top goalscorer of the 1938 Danish football championship, I can't find any significant coverage in secondary sources. Andersen also only played two matches for Denmark national football team, again without clarification. According to corresponding article on Danish Wikipedia, which is likewise a long-time unsourced stub without significant coverage, Andersen played for Boldklubben 1903 but it does not state the year(s). There's no even verification for his death! ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Denmark. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there's a bit of an issue here - there are two Knud Andersens, both of whom played for B. 1903 and Denmark. One was born in 1900, the other in |1917, with the 1917 one probably the top scorer in the 1938 competition, and probably appearing three times for Denmark (the "probably" here is my inability to understand Danish but the other article confirms it). The second one is mentioned here twice. There's another Knud Andersen who played for Skovbakken in the 1970s and another who played for Hvidovre in the 1960s, so this one is tough and will need contemporary Danish sources to confirm. SportingFlyer T·C 14:10, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 19:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Denmark men's international footballers (1–24 caps) in the absence of any sources. Giant Snowman 19:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be fine with redirect as long as the name is established by a source. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 06:37, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are already sources in the article showing this, and more on the Danish wiki. The issue is sources showing notability, not verification. SportingFlyer T·C 08:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wouldn't be surprised if this could pass GNG, this is one that certainly needs research, I do however feel this is a perfectly valid WP:STUB article. This is an example of, interesting this person play two international caps, how and why. There are points of interest already stated which gives people that ability to review it further. However this delete culture destroys the essence of the stub articles these days. Govvy (talk) 20:48, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reuben Wyatt

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

Contested redirect with zero improvement. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep – article is good and Google News turns up plenty of results. – Ike Lek (talk) 21:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reference in the article I would consider WP:SIGCOV. Did you find SIGCOV in Google News? Robby.is.on (talk) 22:13, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:08, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - does anyone know why this used to be a redirect to 1989 FA Vase final? I can't see any mention of him in that article. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. The creator had a sandbox in which he wrote 1989 FA Vase final. After he moved that to mainspace, on top of the ensuing redirect he wrote this article. Then moved that as well. Repeatedly redirecting to the vase final should never have been done, what were they thinking? Geschichte (talk) 06:22, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I only found [34] and [35] which, especially not the last one, do not cut it. Many sources out there from the clubs. Geschichte (talk) 06:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 11:54, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Note that we do NOT usually redirect players to clubs. Giant Snowman 11:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Semi-pro footballer without WP:SIGCOV. Svartner (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dibba Al-Hisn SC

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

Reverted redirect without improvement. Currently not enough sourcing to pass WP:VERIFY. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:10, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. AFD is waste of time/wrong venue per WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, the club played in the 2024–25 UAE Pro League so this must be solved editorially. Geschichte (talk) 17:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Arab Emirates-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:23, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep going to the Arabic wiki, copying the article title, and searching it brings up a wealth of local and national coverage. Easily passes WP:GNG. English coverage harder to search for just because all of the database sites come up first but there are a couple English language match reports as well. SportingFlyer T·C 19:35, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Needs improvements, but easly pass in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 22:07, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Arabic! Yes, the article needs TLC, but it passes GNG! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:39, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There was no consensus or even a discussion to redirect the team to the city on 11 June. [36] The subsequent events seem to be taking that redirect to be the status quo. WP:BEFORE is a thing, two things can be true at the same time: 1. The page is crap and has no sources, 2. The subject is notable and played last season in the top UAE league. Redirecting for lack of sources is usually just a consideration about living people, not organisations. The subject comes from a country with Arabic script, so searching in ABC's won't bring up local and national coverage. Unknown Temptation (talk) 11:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 11:54, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above arguments which show notability. Giant Snowman 11:56, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Gbemie

AfDs for this article:

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

Deleted before. I'm unable to find any independent WP:SIGCOV, only WP:PASSING mentions. Having a cap is not a free pass and h spent most of his career on the eighth, ninth and tenth tier in England. Geschichte (talk) 06:21, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Liberia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:33, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:41, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Best I can find is this. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nyron Dyer

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

I can't find anything resembling WP:SIGCOV for this player. Capped for Montserrat, but the level of that national team is unfathomably low, hence the lack of coverage. Geschichte (talk) 06:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Montserrat national football team#Current squad as WP:ATD. –

Ike Lek (talk) 08:00, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Things that are redirected have to mentioned at the target page, otherwise the redirects are liable for WP:RFD Geschichte (talk) 09:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I could have sworn he was mentioned, but apparently not. Hope I'm not losing it. Ike Lek (talk) 22:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Caribbean. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:32, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:41, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 15:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. "Unfathomably"? What does it mean? I don't understand such a word. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yance Youwei

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

I'm unable to find anything resembling WP:SIGCOV for this player. Geschichte (talk) 06:17, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Indonesia. AllyD (talk) 08:17, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:33, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:41, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – All I found were database sources. Corresponding article on Indonesian Wikipedia is also a stub. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:04, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – per GNG and SIGCOV. 🅷🅴🅽🆁🅸 ^{(Let's talk)} ✉ 05:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Iran Futsal's 2nd Division

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

Going through these minor third-tier futsal leagues in Iran and tagging some for proposed deletion. This one has more sources than others, but none accessible seem to cover it at any significant length. Taking to AfD because not positive that this fails GNG. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 21:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 21:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: while not itself a reason for deletion (and I have no opinion in that realm), and easily fixable without deletion anyway, I can't imagine the continued presence of persistence of will be and similar phrases in an article for a sports season that happened 13 years ago is a good sign… that may indicate a lack of interest of updating the article, which would not be surprising if the significant coverage that would lead people to otherwise update the article and fix that while they're at it is also lacking. (But again, I have nothing to add on that count.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Igor Kuljanac

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

Minimal career, simply not notable, rightfully prodded by @Spiderone in 2009. Geschichte (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovenia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:23, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Not notable under current guidelines. Maybe met a soccer related guideline in 2009, but it does not now and has no WP:SIGCOV. – Ike Lek (talk) 21:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:43, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I found a couple of posts on Facebook relating to him but little else Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:09, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--A09|(talk) 18:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ludovic Viltard

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

French footballer who never rose his career to the top level; he only played (a total of) four Ligue 2 matches for three years between 2000 and 2003, before disappearing for two decades. I didn't find anything other than database sources and secondary ones showed the unrelated Malcom Viltard. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 12:19, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Felipe Argel

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

I'm not sure what the claim to notability is supposed to be here. It looks like he played in the second league of Chile. Geschichte (talk) 07:12, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Chile. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:58, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable soccer player. Surayeproject3 (talk) 11:17, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:34, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fábio Monteiro

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

User:Alexanderalgrim creation that certainly fails WP:SPORTCRIT, and also GNG. Tagged for notability back in 2011, and has also been prodded and deproddeed due to a guideline that no longer exists. Geschichte (talk) 07:08, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Portugal, and Switzerland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable football player. Surayeproject3 (talk) 11:21, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This guy might come close to meeting the GNG: Of the 14 hits on Swissdox, I've got a paragraph or two here [37], a paragraph under "Fabian Frei a consolé le gardien Fabio Monteiro" in the TdG of 16.09.2019, and three mentions in a routine match article titled "Ein hilfloses Anrennen" in the 11.03.2013 Walliser Bote. A bit sparse though. Among the passing mentions are a video caption here [38] which says he "made several great saves" and this article [39] which describes him as "the excellent goalkeeper Fabio Monteiro, who made a number of high-class saves" (translations from Google Translate). I know some people frown on using routine match coverage at all, but I think this is a very weak keep for me. Toadspike [Talk] 17:56, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:34, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not seeing anything here besides routine mentions in match reports. Fails to meet the WP:GNG. Let'srun (talk) 05:21, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Oliveras

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

Long-time stub of a footballer whose only claim to notability was playing for Bordeaux. I can't find any evidence of him playing for Ligue 2 club AC Arles-Avignon, and given that Oliveras was born in 1981, he is most likely retired. Article fails WP:GNG overall. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 03:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and France. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 03:09, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 03:49, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Nedes

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

This player has played one match in his career and has been without a club since 2022. I can't find any WP:SIGCOV in either English, Ukrainian, or Italian. Seems to fail WP:GNG rather clearly. Anwegmann (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Anwegmann (talk) 01:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom, fails GNG. RossEvans19 (talk) 03:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 02:56, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Ukraine, and Italy. Svartner (talk) 02:59, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete – I could only find 2 non-database mentions, both passing mentions that were not independent of the subject. – Ike Lek (talk) 03:04, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Non-notable football player. Surayeproject3 (talk) 11:16, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Callum Osmand

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

Unable to find WP:SIGCOV, and fails WP:GNG. I only found passing mentions about him. ChurnXeke (talk) 22:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Scotland, and Wales. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Article already has SIGCOV. More would be ideal, but there is enough to justify keeping as is. – Ike Lek (talk) 01:54, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Looks enough for WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 02:50, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fulham FC isn't independent, source 2 is a transfer rumour, source 3 routine transfer story with only two lines on Osmand, source 4 isn't independent, source 5 is a Q+A interview with no sigcov of him, source 6 is a blog and source 7 is better but not enough for sigcov. Notability isn't inherited from the clubs he has signed for. Also assuming there will be future sources about him is WP:CRYSTAL. Dougal18 (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future. Current source is absolutely not SIGCOV, it's ROUTINE/transfer stuff. Giant Snowman 18:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sources below which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - @GiantSnowman:, I found [40], [41], [42], and [43] among more sources. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 06:56, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources 1 and 4 fine, the others meh. It's enough though. Giant Snowman 18:28, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Although this footballer hasn't made his professional debut yet, GiantSnowman's reply to Das osmnezz showed that there are plenty IRS SIGCOV to meet GNG. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Could go either way, but seems to meet requirements for footballers and I would argue is more notable than some other articles in this category that have made the cut. Go4thProsper (talk) 19:22, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fransiskus Mumpo

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

I am not able to find support of him meeting WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. I only found WP:PASSING mentions. [44] Geschichte (talk) 14:13, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Fransiskus Mumpo logged nine appearances for Perseru Serui in the fully-professional 2017 Liga 1 season, satisfying WP:NFOOTBALL; this can be proven by player databases such as worldfootball.net and Soccerway. Aeon Sentinel (talk) 16:00, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NFOOTBALL for players does not exist. Geschichte (talk) 18:10, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – All secondary sources I found were passing mentions in match reports and routine squad announcements. Corresponding article on Indonesian Wikipedia is just a stub. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 10:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Bisser

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

Cameroonian player with four professional appearances in South Africa and Eswatini. Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 11:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Africa, Cameroon, and South Africa. Svartner (talk) 11:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Minimal verifiable career does not cut it, although I found the Swaziland story interesting. A good thing is that when Das osmnezz added these links to Wikipedia, they seem to have been added to the Wayback Machine because of that. Geschichte (talk) 05:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete-lacks SIGCOV, seems mostly generic sports stats pages about the subject.Lorraine Crane (talk) 15:50, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel Emuejeraye

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

Nigerian player with local career who played professionally for three years. Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 11:56, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Nigeria. Svartner (talk) 11:56, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. His age is new enough where most resources would be online and a newspaper search would be unlikely. My searches brought nothing besides passing coverage. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 13:06, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, most sources from 2000s Nigerian wouldn't be easily online. Links go dead on the internet far sooner than that. Link rot: "Pew Research found that, in 2023, 38% of pages from 2013 went missing." ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Al Ittihad SC (Nablus)

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

Been tagged since 2023 for citations, was trying to have a go on finding sources, however the Al-Ittihad Club is Jeddah, Saudi Arabia dominates results. The information must have come from somewhere, although I feel it might have been entered first hand and not using secondary sources that we need. This at the moment fails WP:GNG, WP:SIGCOV, unless someone can prove me wrong. Regards, Govvy (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – The Arabic article is far more expansive. An assessment of it would be good. – Ike Lek (talk) 09:00, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Ike Lek (talk) 09:08, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Ike Lek (talk) 09:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of football clubs in Palestine#West Bank – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 11:32, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete One source, uncited, minor team in a little known league. Not notable.Metallurgist (talk) 23:31, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as above. Giant Snowman 18:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - if redirected inclined to move to Nablus city page; i.e. the Nablus#Sports section. Lf8u2 (talk) 01:33, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cristian Quiñones

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

Professional footballer who may have only had three appearances max (possibly just two) at the second tier of American soccer. I couldn't find anything about his time at Santa Fe, but he only would've been in the age range of 16-19 at the time. Raskuly (talk) 07:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Colombia, Florida, and Georgia (U.S. state). Raskuly (talk) 07:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - could not find WP:SIGCOV to establish WP:GNG. Not much of a football career. Plus, his name is shared with others, several false positives turning up, including in academia and mixed martial arts, and maybe even another footballer and yet another footballer. Once I added "football" or "soccer" to the search terms, there were no more sources or false positives only, on Google News, Google Books, Google Scholar, Newspapers.com. If someone manages to find WP:SIGCOV, please ping me. starship.paint (talk / cont) 07:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per starship, though will change vote similarly if sources can be found. Weirdguyz (talk) 08:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 11:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Very few professional appearances, hasn't played since 2011 - fails GNG. RossEvans19 (talk) 13:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, fails GNG. Surayeproject3 (talk) 12:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:37, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:40, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Bennett

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

I couldn't access any of the sources, and it's unlikely this 60s footballer has SIGCOV. RossEvans19 (talk) 19:16, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Ireland. RossEvans19 (talk) 19:16, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - It seems like the sources do still exist, so it seems unfair to say they don't have SIGCOV without accessing them. – Ike Lek (talk) 21:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 01:09, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Were you able to access the articles on the page? Ike Lek (talk) 01:15, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly WP:ROUTINE sources. Svartner (talk) 07:16, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no evidence of meeting WP:GNG. The sources I recently added to the article support content but don't demonstrate significant coverage. Hack (talk) 07:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. As there is limited evidence of significant coverage. The sources in the article (the existing match reports and some other stuff that I found in my own WP:BEFORE) can just about support some of the basic facts of the article (that the subject played football with Shamrock Rovers, when an amateur albeit top-tier Irish club, in the late 1950s; And later joined Sligo Rovers). But these statements (and the sources that support them) do not establish notability. As they are ROTM match reports and other directory-style stats sources. Nor can I find any material biographical coverage of the subject. (While I don't have access to the book mentioned as a possible source in the article, The Hoops: A History of Shamrock Rovers (1993), even if this book afforded specific biographical attention to this one footballer over all others [and that doesn't seem likely] even that type of coverage in a single book, alone, wouldn't meet SIGCOV.) Guliolopez (talk) 17:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:35, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:36, 16 July 2025 (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.

Daniel Dubec

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

Footballer with 103 minutes minutes in the top Slovak league followed by a publicised decision to stop football in order to focus on school [45]. Later career in the Austrian lower divisions does not seem to have attracted significant coverage. C 679 19:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Slovakia. C 679 19:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 19:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 19:20, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning Keep – I found more articles about him quitting the Slovak league. [46][47] Seems like it got some coverage, but I'm not sure about WP:SUSTAINED. – Ike Lek (talk) 21:56, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KFF Kamza

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

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:47, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Here are two notable sources: one of the largest sports newspapers in Albania, Panorama Sport, wrote an article about the club here; Club lineup, which includes its logo, found in the Albanian Football Federation website here.

Kj1595 (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Albania. Shellwood (talk) 22:31, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:54, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Kategoria Superiore Femra as possible search term. Giant Snowman 13:12, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per GiantSnowman or delete - no in-depth coverage that I can find; the sources in the article and those offered by Kj1595 here are not SIGCOV so this subject does not satisfy GNG. I can't access the book source but even if it had a chapter on the club that would not be enough, multiple sources are needed. Meadowlark (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to FC Kamza men's club, as long as women's club by years maybe gets more attention and being noticed. Lanceloth345 (talk) 16:10, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we have two different suggested redirect target articles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:45, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect After i saw briefly options i'll stick to redirect as per GiantSnowmen to Kategoria Superiore Femra seems more logicall, with premise women's team in future gets noticed. Lanceloth345 (talk) 19:38, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adlane Messelem

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

Declined PROD based on this source [48]. Too little to establishes WP:GNG for a staff personnel. Svartner (talk) 04:13, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Algeria, Singapore, and France. Svartner (talk) 04:13, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that article is certainly a start. One or two more like that and I think he'd have WP:SIGCOV. I'll take a bit of a look. Ike Lek (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- ok, so far I have found these [49][50][51][52][53][54] and I can't tell if this is the same person [55] While he seems to be a French Algerian, he likely has an Arabic name as he appears to be closely connected to the country and not just a French person born there. If anyone knows what it might be, I may be able to find more info on his earlier life. - Ike Lek (talk) 05:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:13, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Sources above look to be WP:NOTNEWS. If significant sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:18, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep? I'm surprised how much coverage there is of him coaching Sabah FC for only a couple months mostly because I'm not very familiar with Malaysian coverage, but it looks like it's enough for an article. I found a couple PressReader articles as well which are near impossible to correctly link. SportingFlyer T·C 19:21, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—I think I might be able to be convinced on this one (even though the article itself is terrible), but as it stands, there's nothing but speculation that he might come close to WP:GNG. Currently, though, he fails it. Anwegmann (talk) 01:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per sources in article (like the FourFourTwo source) and ones supplied by Ike Lek. Has experience managing a few pro teams and has sources. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 06:51, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: The last two sources from Singapore are about this person; I pulled up the Independent in my own search, then saw it was already sourced in the article. Some coverage about him being hired with little to no experience/lack of local knowledge. Oaktree b (talk) 13:59, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2027 FIFA Women's World Cup qualification (AFC)

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

Unnecessary duplication of 2026 AFC Women's Asian Cup qualification and 2026 AFC Women's Asian Cup. Article titles of this format, i.e. World Cup qualification (confederation), are generally for stand-alone tournaments, such as those hosted by CONMEBOL, OFC, and UEFA this cycle. AFC has indicated they will hold a stand-alone tournament for the 2031 FIFA Women's World Cup. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:07, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Asia. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:07, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they also unnecessarily duplicate the qualification and main tournament pages for their respective confederation tournaments:

— Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:19, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Africa and North America.— Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:36, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom, as duplication. Giant Snowman 18:21, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning redirect to 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup qualification#AFC per WP:CHEAP and WP:ATD. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why is this not listed in deletion sorting for Sports and Football? Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is showing complete process of Asian qualification to the 2027 FIFA Women's World Cup, Asian Cup and its qualification both are part of Asian World Cup qualification, so they should be present at same place. WikiEditPS (talk) 16:28, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiEditPS: The issue is that none of the nominated articles add anything that would not already be covered in the other articles. See WP:NOPAGE. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 17:43, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:38, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into one of the suggested articles. It took me a bit to wrap my head around this, but it clearly is the same thing as mentioned in the nom. Metallurgist (talk) 02:39, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pak Yong-ho

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

Declined PROD by an IP user. No WP:SIGCOV found. Svartner (talk) 01:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Japan, and South Korea. Svartner (talk) 01:27, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:51, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 18:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - best name to search for is probably "朴永浩" since he played in Japan and there is another soccer player in Korea with the same name, so using his Korean name could be confusing, and translating his surname as Pak instead of Park in English is a little odd, but does seem to be how he is listed in English records. That being said, most mentions of him seem to be in articles about his son. – Ike Lek (talk) 23:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1996–97 FA Women's Premier League Cup

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

Contested redirect a couple of times without the addition of a single in-depth reliable source. And Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:24, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain why this article should be deleted? This is one of many cup competition seasons recorded on here that have not had this action put towards them. Why is this particular article causing an issue? It is sourced with two reliable sources (The Football Association Website and a fan created site which has been used as a source for other articles of that era), which lists all the results and a detailed record of the final. This is consistent with all other seasons of the Premier League Cup which have not been flagged in this manner. This page was previously a redirect to the main Premier League Cup page, which was not a suitable arrangement as it did not contain the detail which has been expressed here. This is also part of the chain of articles that allows people to navigate through the history of the completion season by season, both through the links at the top of the article and at the bottom of the page.

This article cannot be deleted, as it is a key part of the history of the Premier League Cup Competition. If there is anything further that needs adding to it, or any amendments that need making to it, please let me know so these changes can be made. Thank You. Adam Salter (talk) 18:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Football, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:16, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The explanation is above. Zero in-depth sources from independent, reliable sources. Right now it has one source from a primary source (not independent), and one fan-based source (not reliable). Also, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:05, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, if there aren't currently enough sources currently attached to this, then I will find more to use as citations to back up the article.

Are you able to elaborate further what is classed as 'in depth' for a source, and how great a quantity of sources are needed to deem this article acceptable? Adam Salter (talk) 22:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can you please elaborate on how the Full Time FA Source is not an Independent Source? What link or conflict have you established between it and Wikipedia? Thanks. Adam Salter (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:46, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:46, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:24, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to FA Women's National League Cup#List of seasons and finals as possible search term. Giant Snowman 10:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why is a redirect preferable over the actual article in this instance? Adam Salter (talk) 12:53, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because, as has already been explained above (and which you seem to acknowledge yesterday), there are not enough in-depth sources. See WP:SIGCOV. Redirection is an alternative to deletion, see WP:ATD. Giant Snowman 13:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have since added plenty of sources to the article though, including stats website, newspapers articles and matchday programmes. Is this not acceptable? Adam Salter (talk) 13:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Stats websites and match reports are not SIGCOV. Please actually bother to read the links I send you, I'm trying to help. Giant Snowman 15:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I really appreciate your help this, honestly. And I know you have to deal with a lot of these discussions and a lot of these similar arguments with other pages, so thank you. It's just a bit confusing for me, because I've read the SIGCOV, and to me it describes a source which is an all encompassing one for the article, rather than just a few side mentions the other sources may have had. I therefore thought the FA Full Time Site was exactly that, as it covers all the results of the competition for that season. It wasn't a match report written at the time, it's a page of information that does describe the Final, and then lists all of the results for the year at the bottom. I assumed this was a Verifiable Source, and the way I had interpreted it was that this would be my primary SIGCOV Source, and then everything else would be Secondary to supplement it. Apparently, the argument is that the FA Full Time Site is not independent from Wikipedia, which I cannot fathom. There is no conflict of interest here with the FA, they aren't going to financially benefit from this, are they? Why is the Full Time FA Site not a SIGCOV source? Adam Salter (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this competition was indeed covered in the media as evidenced by the sources currently in the article. The FA Site isn't SIGCOV because it's not independent of the competition, but competitions are a bit odd because one of the things which makes a competition notable is continued routine coverage, which is exactly what is in the article. Not all of the sources are good for notability including the matchday programmes, but there's more than enough here to keep. SportingFlyer T·C 08:12, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also note to the closer, when this was nominated there were only two sources, neither of which were good. SportingFlyer T·C 08:13, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:14, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Sufficient WP:SIGCOV for a competition edition article. Svartner (talk) 06:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:19, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mohammad Shahjahan (footballer)

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

Only one professional appearance, fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 13:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and India. Svartner (talk) 13:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Manipur-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:57, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Subject absolutely does meet WP:GNG with current sourcing. The amount of AfD nominations this editor has done for soccer players in a short period indicates that they are not doing WP:BEFORE. If they had, they would have also found (all in English):

This is in addition to the notable coverage already referenced in the article, as well as the likely additional coverage in the many local languages of places he has played.

Rapid-fire nominations for deletion only makes Wikipedia worse. – Ike Lek (talk) 00:55, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about an Indian player who never even pursued a professional career and only has sources mentioning a call-up for an under-17 team. I reiterate, the subject clearly fails in WP:GNG, including when compared to better articles/with more sources about footballers who only played at youth level that were also deleted. Svartner (talk) 15:19, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. The Scroll source looks OK, but not enough on its own. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 10:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The sources from Khelnow and Scroll are enough to meet WP:BASIC, because those cover stories about the person himself. I feel the article should be expanded if this AfD ended up being kept. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:06, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Read Khelnow and Scroll carefully - one is just a rehash of the other. In other words, they count as 1 source. Geschichte (talk) 12:16, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not enough for a WP:YOUNGATH. The sources go on about U12, U14 etc which amount to nothing in the sports world. Geschichte (talk) 12:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per above. Youth international prospect with fully pro appearances and sources. Definitely also has Indian language sources besides the English ones already here. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 03:36, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Almost all of the sources fail WP:YOUNGATH, and he only made one appearance. I almost put draftify before realising his appearance was some years ago. SportingFlyer T·C 19:24, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Football proposed deletions WP:PROD

Golf

Articles for deletion

Proposed deletions

Categories

Handball

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Handball

Deletion review

none

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

Files proposed for deletion

None

Templates for deletion

None

Categories

Current vacant

Ice hockey

Ventura Vikings

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

Redirect to United States Premier Hockey League. I am unable to find much independent coverage at all of this amateur team, let alone enough to meet WP:GNG. JTtheOG (talk) 23:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Ice hockey, and California. JTtheOG (talk) 23:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Redirect, but I believe there will be some coverage going over the team as the team continues to play [56],[57]. Conyo14 (talk) 21:12, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There might be in the future, but both of those pieces are explicitly promotional. JTtheOG (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jiří Jakeš

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

Among the refernces are only databases and brief mentions, no WP:SIGCOV founded. Non-notable player with only 14 top-tier appearances. FromCzech (talk) 05:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Ice hockey, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 05:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:: I found an interview with him after his performance as Czechia's captain at the 2009 Winter Universiad. Does that count as significant coverage? Шахматист2025 (talk) 21:24, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. People on here tend to be pretty dismissive of interviews of the subject. They say since it is the subject speaking about themself, it isn't independent, which is true of the interview content. If the interview is in the context of broader coverage of the subject, it can count, but probably not if it is just a post-performance interview. Still, if you link it, I can take a look. Ike Lek (talk) 21:37, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Jiří Jakeš k univerziádě: Měli jsme získat nejméně bronz!" (in Czech). Denik.cz. 5 March 2009. I also added it to the article. There's also another interview, "Cítím, že už rodině hodně dlužím, ale hokej by mi chyběl, říká Jakeš" (in Czech). Hokej.cz. 28 January 2017. That's from the final year of his career, but I don't know where to put it in the article. Шахматист2025 (talk) 00:30, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those could both be useful for improving the article, but probably aren't sufficiently independent to show notability, as they are mostly direct quotes from him. You are welcome to try to improve the article, but it is likely to be deleted without non-interview independent coverage. Ike Lek (talk) 01:07, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Giannino

AfDs for this article:

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

fails WP:GNG; I did some searching and was not able to find significant coverage (either for her acting career or her ice hockey career) in any reliable source Joeykai (talk) 23:36, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Sportspeople, Women, Film, Television, and Ice hockey. Joeykai (talk) 23:36, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree: The CWHL fails Wikipedia:NHOCKEY/LA, and her career also fails WP:SPORTSCRIT. Combined with the lack of media attention, I regrettably agree that this article should face deletion. That being said, there is something to be said about the inherent notability of someone who has consistently achieved at a high level, even when such achievement doesn't get media attention. Doesn't change my vote, but she is obviously extremely talented, and I dislike the deletion of the article because there isn't sufficient coverage. Unfortunately, we are at the whim of what media decides to cover, and what people decide to care about, and in this case, Women's professional hockey and inline skating is not it. Foxtrot620 (talk) 01:34, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:59, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Two of the sources in the article, in Pulse magazine [58] and Telegram & Gazette [59], have sigcov of her. They do include interviews with her, but also have info about her career and her life outside hockey (studying biology and speech language pathology, which could be added to this article. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 03:53, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find information about her being drafted [60], that's a primary source anyway; doesn't seem to be much coverage. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 14:23, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per RebeccaGreen - Ike Lek (talk) 04:43, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The second source that Rebecca provided seems more like a directory and doesn't convince me, but the first one I think might be enough. Would also suggest a draftify as a middle ground. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any more supporters for Draftification?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:26, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify – Per InvadingInvader and Liz. Svartner (talk) 12:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The article is already ~450 words and has 12 sources. What would be the benefit of moving to draftspace? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per RG. --Hockeyben ^{(talk -} ^contribs) 05:53, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Martial arts

Articles for deletion

Jules-Albert Ndemba

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. The only reference is a database and there doesn't appear to be anything better elsewhere from what I can tell. A redirect to Cameroon at the 1984 Summer Olympics may be suitable here. Let'srun (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, Olympics, and Cameroon. Let'srun (talk) 00:40, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Fails GNG due to no SIGCOV. Frank Anchor 14:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rony Khawam

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

Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG. A search on the Eastmain MENA database and google turned up nothing other than results about unrelated people. Let'srun (talk) 15:12, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, Olympics, and Lebanon. Let'srun (talk) 15:12, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per lack of a clear redirect target. Svartner (talk) 16:22, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I think this one has potential to have sources. He has also been recorded as competing for Liberia. [61] I'd love to hear is anyone was access to this: [62]. – Ike Lek (talk) 23:17, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Polish Wikipedia lists his Arabic name as ‏رونالد خوام‎ but that doesn't seem to be correct. Ike Lek (talk) 23:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The NewspaperArchive source is just a listing of results: "Hassen Ben Gamra, Tunisia, def. Rony Khawam, Lebanon". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ike Lek (talk) 18:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Diop

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

Subject lacks the needed coverage to meet the WP:GNG. The current sources are all databases and I couldn't find anything better in a BEFORE. Let'srun (talk) 00:15, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, Olympics, and Africa. Let'srun (talk) 00:15, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: [63] was about all I could find, confirmation that he was at the Olympics. Long way from notability. Oaktree b (talk) 02:51, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Association of Professional Martial Artists

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

Fails to meet WP:N or WP:NORG, the only references include passing mentions at best. As the organisation appears to be defunct, it's unlikely any additional sources will materialise. JeffUK 21:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Martial arts, and Florida. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:08, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gustavo Trujillo

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

Subject fails WP:GNG, and WP:ANYBIO for not having significant coverage from independent, reliable sources whereby the sources talk about the subject in length and in depth and not only passing mentioned for verification. Fight records/announcements/results are considered routine sport report and they can not be used to contribute to the notability guidelines. The legal issues are mostly from interviews which means the sources are not independent and fail meeting notability requirements. The subject also fails WP:NBOX, WP:NMMA, WP:NKICK for not meeting the said criteria. Cassiopeia talk 23:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Martial arts, and Cuba. Cassiopeia talk 23:43, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Should have never made it out of draft, doesn't meet GNG, NMMA or NKICK. Nswix (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep – my analysis of the current sources are as follows:

1. Mostly interview, but with a little independent prose that can contribute to notability

2. Short but WP:SIGCOV

3. Routine coverage. Fine to use in the article, but doesn't contribute to notability.

4. Possible SIGCOV, but bordering on routine coverage

5. Just fight results, no contribution to notability

6, 7, and 8. Similar to #4. admittedly they have some good prose, but feels kinda tabloid. MAYBE can contribute to notability

9. SIGCOV, but not very in-depth. Still worth something, but not a ton.

10. Coverage about an interview is not the same as just an interview transcript. Suitably independent, questionably in-depth, but overall this can contribute to notability.

11. Passing coverage, not SIGCOV

12. Clear SIGCOV. If it is independent, this is a good contributor to showing notability.

– Ike Lek (talk) 00:56, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How could it be a keep when subject fails GNG? As mentioned (1) interviews are not independent sources (2) souces content needs to talk about the subject in length and in depth and not passing motioned. and subject also fails NKICK, NBOX, NMMA and ANYBIO. Cassiopeia talk 01:11, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain what part of WP:GNG you believe the subject does not meet? Ike Lek (talk) 01:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Already explained in above. Cassiopeia talk 01:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he is the National Police Gazette heavyweight champion which I think should count for something SpainMMAfan123 (talk) 21:32, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National Police Gazette heavyweight champion does not meet NBOX, NKICK or NMMA requirements. Cassiopeia talk 22:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews are not independent sources, but they can be part of independent coverage. Ike Lek (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interview is not independent "source" and it can NOT be used to contribute to the notability guidelines to have a stand alone article. Cassiopeia talk 09:00, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Why is this on mainspace? fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Lekkha Moun (talk) 19:22, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RS Lakshan Don

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

No evidence of notability. Lack of reliable sourcing is evident, and a WP:BEFORE only shows coverage from social media sites. Fails WP:GNG. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Martial arts, and Sri Lanka. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see a single reference that represents significant and independent coverage of the subject. Many, if not most, of the sources don't even mention his name. Results of competitions that he didn't compete in and notices from the dojo he teaches at fail to meet WP:GNG. I also don't see any SNG that he meets. Papaursa (talk) 16:08, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I searched for information about the subject but couldn’t find anything from independent and reliable news sources. The subject fails to meet the criteria of WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 10:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

After a deletion discussion it was decided to merge Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Motorsports into this page. For the archive of WikiProject Deletion sorting/Motorsports, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Motorsports/archive.

Motorsport

Articles for deletion

List of IndyCar Series drivers who never qualified for a race

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

This grouping has not been described as a set by secondary sources, and as such WP:LISTN is not met here. PROD was removed by the creator so bringing this to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Sports, Motorsport, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails LISTN and reads as OR. If the list is accurate, only one person attempted qualification more than once without qualifying, so this seems like CRUFT. I cannot find any secondary sources that cover the subject in depth, so also fails GNG and V. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 20:34, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I'm not a racing expert, but I'd expect the list to be much longer... This feels rather small for what it is. No sources talk about this,all I can find are wiki mirrors of this aritcle. Oaktree b (talk) 23:41, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – The content of the lists is relevant, but there is a lack of sources for WP:V. Svartner (talk) 12:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this article doesn't meet WP:LISTN, and is frankly just trivia. All but one of these people only tried to qualify once. If this were a notable topic, there would be proper sources talking about the entire list- which there isn't. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:28, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Oddly specific listicle, wholly unsourced, screams WP:FANCRUFT to me. Fun bit of trivia to those who care, but not something that belongs on Wikipedia. MSport1005 (talk) 14:11, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It was created with Verifiable sources, every list is created from verifiable sources and not lifted from elsewhere that "covers" the topic of the list. -Drdisque (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as a weirdly constructed list, per MSport1005, and because it's synthesis. Bearian (talk) 14:17, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Champ Car drivers who never qualified for a race

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

This grouping has not been described as a set by secondary sources, and WP:LISTN is not met here. PROD was removed by the creator so bringing this to AfD. Let'srun (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Sports, Motorsport, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this article doesn't meet WP:LISTN, and is frankly just trivia. All but one of these people only tried to qualify once. If this were a notable topic, there would be proper sources talking about the entire list- which there isn't. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:29, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of IndyCar Series drivers who never qualified for a race could've been nominated together. MSport1005 (talk) 14:13, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is a complement to and was created the same way as List of Champ Car drivers which nobody has an issue with. -Drdisque (talk) 15:01, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of World Rally Championship people

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

Firstly, it's WP:TOOBROAD and could be a list of over a million names of people who would mostly not be notable. Secondly, there is only one source to suggest that the grouping itself is notable for inclusion as a list, but this appears to be a navigational structure of a website that contains a handful of biographies. Thirdly, it isn't useful as a contribution to human knowledge but is appearing to serve as a directory, which WP is not. Rally Wonk (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. Rally Wonk (talk) 17:53, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Relevant discussion at WikiProject World Rally

Rally Wonk (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:52, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning delete - Right now this clearly falls under WP:NOTDIRECTORY, but it's possible that the scope of this article could be refined to not be WP:TOOBROAD and to make something more encyclopaedic, although it would likely need to be moved to a different title and substantially rewritten in that case, so there is just an argument for WP:TNT here. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 00:39, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I expressed my opinion over that discussion already. Not too big of a sport to group all notable people in one place. Pelmeen10 (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zack Scoular

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

Only sources in article and found in WP:BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE news clippings, with which one can only make little more than a database entry of statistics and not an encyclopedic article, thus failing WP:NOT. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 14:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Video games, Motorsport, Australia, and New Zealand. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 14:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 14:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Finished runner-up in a Formula Regional championship and a multiple-time race winner at Formula Three level—fairly notable as a junior driver. WP:SIGCOV is found here: [64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72]. There are several race reports at the level that go beyond trivial mentions. MB 2437 22:19, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make an SA table when a I'm home from work but many of these are interviews with the subject which would not be independent, and/or focus on other topics, such as the championship he's competing in, or the 00r0 Motorsport video game team. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 22:59, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not !voting until I read other opinions, but I think this is a good example of bare notability. Under different interpretations of WP:GNG, I think the big determining factor is whether or not interviews are considered as independent- I've heard differing opinions between AfD and AfC.

My source breakdown:

- Formula Scout [73], [74] I think are both GNG compliant, but are on the shorter side. Since it's the same outlet, we can count that as one source.

- VelocityNews article about going to Europe ([75]); I think this is GNG compliant, but others may have concerns about independence.

- NZ Herald [76]. I can't view this because of the paywall, but given that this is a notable organization (The New Zealand Herald), I'd assume it's good. However, I don't want to make assertions about it unless I can actually read it.

- Feeder Series interview [77], good if we are allowing interviews.

- Stuff comes from a notable outlet, but once again is an interview.

Main determining factor in my opinion is the NZ Herald article and whether or not interviews count as acceptable under GNG. GalacticVelocity08 (talk) 01:31, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to view the paywalled Herald article via archive.org here Nil🥝^Talk 11:24, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Include iRacing controversy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.89.249.120 (talk) 21:07, 18 July 2025 (UTC)~~ [reply]

This discussion belongs at Talk:Zack Scoular. MB 2437 21:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

if hes not deleted, theres no reason not to add this to this persons wiki 76.90.212.34 (talk) 03:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

Categories

Rugby league

List of international rugby league caps for Darren Lockyer

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

Single source article. No other player has this type of article. Mn1548 (talk) 14:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Rugby league, Lists, and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 14:41, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, also per WP:NOTSTATS. LibStar (talk) 13:51, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shay Martyn

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

Redirect to List of St Helens R.F.C. players as I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this rugby league player. JTtheOG (talk) 19:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and England. JTtheOG (talk) 19:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - made his SL debut for St Helens.Fleets (talk) 08:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- From reading other AfD I believe making a debut is no longer sufficient for notability. Mn1548 (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable career and lack of references. Mn1548 (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Not notable enough for a stand-alone article. J Mo 101 (talk) 17:16, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 21:23, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keane Gilford

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

Redirect to List of St Helens R.F.C. players as I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV. JTtheOG (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and England. JTtheOG (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - made his SL debut for St Helens.Fleets (talk) 08:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- From reading other AfD I believe making a debut is no longer sufficient for notability. Mn1548 (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable career and lack of references. Mn1548 (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. Not notable enough for a stand-alone article. J Mo 101 (talk) 17:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 21:23, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preston Riki

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

Disputed redirect, with no improvement. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:43, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

>Speedy Keep Yes, I am the one who published article, I will admit it. But it meets Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league/Notability#Notability which says: player, or coach of rugby league football is presumed notable if they: and section 3 of the criteria says:

Have appeared in at least one match of a fully professional club Rugby league competition:
* National Rugby League ^{(see Note 1)}, or
* Super League ^{(see Note 1)} including Challenge Cup appearances.

~~Less relevant, but note 1 also says : Note 1: or their earlier iterations in the UK, Australia or New Zealand.~~

Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Onel5969 Also, could you please list this in the list of New Zealand and Rugby League related deletion discussions? Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:19, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Servite et contribuere The guideline you quoted is out of date, it's no longer sufficient to simply play one match to be considered notable. Has to satisfy WP:SPORTCRIT (no particular opinion whether this player does or not at the moment). J Mo 101 (talk) 09:23, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

J Mo 101 Oh. Didn't see that. When did it get suppressed? Servite et contribuere (talk) 09:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NSPORTS2022. J Mo 101 (talk) 10:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby league, and New Zealand. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:39, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And out of an abundance of caution: I (who is not the nominator) would have sorted this even if Servite et contribuere hadn't requested it (I always sort based on the applicable delsort lists a discussion has not yet been added to). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:34, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Don't know how to put in my own words, but thanking what you told me you do in this message: I always sort based on the applicable delsort lists a discussion has not yet been added to. Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:36, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby league/Notability#Notability is not policy. Nor is it even a guideline. It's a project's advice. It used to be a guideline, but, like WP:NFOOTY, was deprecated years ago. WP:NSPORTS is the SNG guideline. If you click on WP:NRUGBY, it brings you to the applicable section of NSPORTS which says, "Sports which are not listed on this page should defer to the § Basic criteria for guidance. This includes both those which were never listed, and those which were but have since been removed, most recently following an RfC from January–March 2022."Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:29, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Two appearances is non-notable in my opinion, and lack of sources supports non-notability. Mn1548 (talk) 09:44, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mn1548 How about restore redirect instead maybe? Servite et contribuere (talk) 09:56, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No objections to that at present, but if said Riki were to leave Penrith then redirect would need changing at a later date so preferences would be to delete, as at 27 this isn't a young academy player who is likely to be notable in the near future. Mn1548 (talk) 10:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changing vote to a weak delete. With sources found and listed on this AfD coverage has improved thus improving WP:GNG, thought still not convinced two NRL appearance and an all star game is a notable career in itself despite the coverage. Mn1548 (talk) 10:44, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Narrowly passes WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. He did play in an All Stars match and did score a try. So probably barely passes WP:GNG. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note I have struck my original vote and argument for a valid one. Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete because coverage is very thin. The news.com.au profile is one article, then I found some^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4] other mentions (and many more on NRL.com), but I'm still not convinced this is enough to prove WP:GNG. David Palmer//cloventt ^(talk) 15:34, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

References

^ Miller, Scott (2024-06-02), "Kiwi-NRL Spotlight: The Preston Riki Debut For Panthers", The Niche Cache, archived from the original on 2025-07-13, retrieved 2025-07-13
^ Hamilton, Robbie (2024-05-29), "Preston Riki scores big with Panthers debut tears | LeagueNews.co", LeagueNews.co, retrieved 2025-07-13
^ Blyth, Jack (2025-07-13), "WATCH: Preston Riki’s run sets up Jordan for stellar Māori try", Zero Tackle, retrieved 2025-07-13
^ Nicolussi, Christian (2024-05-31), "Meet the rookies hoping to keep the Penrith Panthers juggernaut going", The Sydney Morning Herald, retrieved 2025-07-13

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The news.com.au article addresses the topic directly and in detail (WP:SIGCOV). Further coverage at Fox Sports and nine.com.au.[78][79], in addition to those already mentioned. Jevansen (talk) 11:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Jevansen. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 02:11, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby union

David Duffus

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

No evidence that this rugby player is notable. The one source provided is no longer live, and is not recorded at the Internet Archive. I can find no evidence via Google, any of the rugby stats sites, the British Newspaper Archive, and the Irish Newspaper Archives, to suggest he has played for Saracens, Ulster or Edinburgh, or any professional rugby team, or that he's been selected for England 7s. The only teams I can find his name associated with are Chingford RFC and Romford and Gidea Park Rugby Club, which are in level 7 and 6 respectively of the English rugby pyramid and not professional. Nicknack009 (talk) 18:44, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additional: I've one a little more digging. The title of the newspaper article cited suggests he played for Edinburgh Academicals ("Accies"), and I've found a different newspaper article showing him playing for them in 2009. Accies are not a professional team, and not the same team as Edinburgh Rugby, who are professional. Under the old rules, he'd have been presumed notable if he'd played for Edinburgh Rugby, but that's not enough any more. His Contactout profile says he was in the Saracens academy for one season in 2006-07, but no indication he ever played for their senior team. Can't find anything connecting him to Ulster. So no sign of significant coverage of him, and the article appears to be inaccurate. --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:01, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Very little coverage, the fact we can’t verify most of the claims given is enough for me.

RodneyParadeWanderer (talk) 16:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Nicknack009 (talk) 18:49, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't see anything about a rugby player, the one source in the article isn't helpful. A few hits on the name, a scientist, random hits. Oaktree b (talk) 20:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandre Chazalet

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

This rugby union football player only has one source to support his notability. Therefore, his page fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. I also did a search for other sources and was unable to find sources that mention him that would bolster including him or retaining his page. On these grounds, I believe this page should be deleted. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 23:00, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Rugby union, and France. Shellwood (talk) 23:59, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found these [80][81]. Not sure if they are worth anything. Ike Lek (talk) 00:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Coverage here [82], but it's part of an interview. Here [83]. Le Dauphine has a few other articles about this person as well. Oaktree b (talk) 00:18, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With the two in the comment above mine, enough to show notability. Oaktree b (talk) 00:19, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. SigCov in French language sources linked to above. More than trivial mentions. Jevansen (talk)
Keep Found Significant coverage ([84], [85], [86]) to demonstrate the notability of this Footballer. ~~Meet WP:NFOOTY~~. Raj Shri21 (talk) 13:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the addition coverage you have found, and I agree with keeping the article, although I felt I should inform you that WP:NFOOTY is an essay that has been superseded by WP:Notability (sports) and does not currently reflect official policy. Ike Lek (talk) 22:03, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ike Lek, Thank You for notified me, i really agree with you, WP:Notability (sports) is an essay. Raj Shri21 (talk) 08:47, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

... and is related to a different sport entirely. Jevansen (talk) 03:20, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby union at the 1979 Mediterranean Games

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

Reverted redirect without improvement. Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:08, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:20, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Morocco, Tunisia, France, Italy, Spain, and Yugoslavia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:51, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep First of all, I've created the page and after a while "User:Onel5969" redirected page despite this notable content. If the internet was widespread in 1979, there would have been more online resources like the 2009 Mediterranean Games. Are we to say that an article is not noteworthy simply because of technological backwardness? Old newspaper archives are invaluable resources for sports organizations and difficult to access unless they have been transferred online. However, when the same information is checked from newspaper sources in different countries, there is no doubt about the accuracy of the information. I used four fundamental newspaper archives for 1979 Mediterranean Games. Slovenian Delo and Primorski dnevnik, Spanish El Mundo Deportivo, and Serbian Borba. These four newspaper archives can be accessed free and online. Unfortunately, I'm currently having problems accessing these newspaper archives, but I think it can be solved in time because 3 months ago these archives were active and I remember I used these sources last summer. For this reason, I cannot provide in-line references, otherwise I can create almost the same article like them: Water polo at the 1979 Mediterranean Games and Basketball at the 1979 Mediterranean Games. Because, there is quite a lot of content related to the Mediterranean Games in the sports pages of the relevant newspapers dated September 1979. If the 1979 Mediterranean Games are noteworthy, I don't think there can be any doubt that the sports of these games are noteworthy. If the sports of the Mediterranean Games are not noteworthy, I can throw away my research in the newspaper archives. The Mediterranean Games are no different from the Asian Games or the Pan-American Games. Because there are many articles on sports such as Sepak takraw at the 1990 Asian Games, which is not a widespread sport, but I'm surprised that the notability of a sport such as rugby, which is widely popular around the world, is questioned in an international sports event where countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea compete.

All in all, I think it would be very unfair if this page is deleted because I can't provide in-line references or because the newspaper archive links are temporarily not working. However, please feel free to delete it if it will not be noteworthy just because it is rugby, even though I can footnote the relevant sources score by score as a result of the discussion here. You can even delete the other 3 rugby pages in the Mediterranean Games (in here. I would also like to ask for suggestions for other sports articles such as water polo because I don't want to spend hours adding information for a team sport other than football, basketball and volleyball if it will be deleted like this.

P.S. I've checked this page and so far no rugby related article in any international sports organization has been deleted except for the Maccabiah Games which is an international multi-sport event featuring Jews and Israelis.--Sabri76'^talk 07:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Per above. Svartner (talk) 16:27, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Just noting that neither of the !votes above are actually based in policy.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Can exist per WP:SPINOUT. Details of the events during the games are too long to be mentioned in the main article, so it can has its own article. Nanahuatl (talk) 05:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - SPINOUT is yet another argument not suitable for an AfD discussion. As per WP:WHENSPLIT, even when splitting an article, the notability of the article must be addressed.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence of WP:SIGCOV has been provided, and we are essentially asked to AGF on the fact that such SIGCOV actually exists. Until the existence of SIGCOV can actually be established, the article should be deleted. I agree with Onel5969 that SPINOUT does not authorize any sub-article about the non-notable aspects of a notable topic. JBchrch talk 13:54, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to solicit sourcing that provides the significant, in-depth coverage required by our guidelines, rather than just proof the event took place. WP:SPINOUT is not an alternative to WP:GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 19:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Templates for discussion

Softball

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Do not comment on these articles here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, the remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.

Templates for discussion

Template:Softball Boxscore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Template:Softballbox7 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Categories for discussion

Tennis

2024 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles final

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

To borrow from the ongoing AFD nomination for the 2025 Wimbledon Championships - Men's singles final, Tennis Project Guidelines say match articles are only created for "matches of record-setting events or matches with significant controversies." Individual major match finals are only supposed to be created when the press describes it as one of the greatest of all-time. Routine matches like this one do not have the same extra notability. This a run-of-the-mill three-set Wimbledon final. In summary this is a bog-standard Grand Slam final and this article should be deleted or redirected to 2024 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 12:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Tennis, and England. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 12:01, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:37, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This match is not notable and does not meet the standards to have it's own independent page. Reaper1945 (talk) 17:06, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - unambiguously meets GNG, not to mention WP:SPORTSEVENT. —Rutebega (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a tennis fan, but bog-standard Grand Slam final sounds like an oxymoron. (Keep per GNG). Cremastra (talk · contribs) 22:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Agreed with comment above ~ BlitzPhoenix98, 1:19, 21 July 2025 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlitzPhoenix98 (talk • contribs)

Delete - does not meet WikiProject Tennis's requirements of a match setting records or being controversial – it also specifically asks users to "consult WP:TENNIS before creating such articles", which I assume didn't happen here. The match also does not meet the lasting significance criterion for event notability, since it was a "bog-standard Grand Slam final" as the nominator describes. --Iiii I I I (talk) 22:25, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Routine is what we should be avoiding in creating finals articles. This was a 3-set slaughter that will have no lasting significance. That's what we use the 2024 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles article for. Talking about the final, showing the draw, etc... Only when we truly have something magnificent do we create a stand-alone article on the final, as the Tennis Project Guidelines properly tell us. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:18, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A routine final. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daria Lodikova

AfDs for this article:

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

Tennis player with a highest singles ranking of 296 and doubles of 397. All the sourcing is passing mentions in drawsheets, results pages and articles about other players. At the previous AFD in 2023 this was draftified for better sourcing to be found but that has not happened and I am unable to find anything substantial. I strongly suggest editors read the previous AFD discussion before voting. Fails SIGCOV and should be deleted. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, and Russia. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If it was TOOSOON in 2023 and now in 2025 she's either 296th or 500 and something... She's not notable. Lack of any sort of sourcing reinforces that fact. Oaktree b (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gsearch only brings up match websites or the WTA. She's 400th something now, if that helps... Very non-notable. Oaktree b (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Made her WTA Tour debut after qualifying for the main draw of the 2025 Iași Open singles main draw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vecihi91 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can't find anything in my searches that's even close to a significant, independent coverage of the player. While she did qualify for the main draw of Iasi, per WP:NSPORT/FAQ, which WP:NTENNIS is also a part of, says: "The topic-specific notability guidelines described on this page do not replace the general notability guideline. They are intended only to stop an article from being quickly deleted when there is very strong reason to believe that significant, independent, non-routine, non-promotional secondary coverage from multiple reliable sources is available, given sufficient time to locate it". No reliable sources cover her or the Iasi result beyond match stats or databases. All of her Futures titles are the lower tiers of W15 to W35, so nothing else from WP:NTENNIS criteria to add to make it a more stronger case. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:40, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Something does not make sense. She's allegedly made hundreds of thousands of dollars to play tennis and came close to the bottom of the barrel? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Bearian (talk) 19:45, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles final

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

Tennis Project Guidelines say we only create match articles of "matches of record-setting events or matches with significant controversies." Individual major match finals are only supposed to be created when the press describes it as one of the greatest of all-time. Routine matches like this one do not have the same extra notability. This a run-of-the-mill four-set Wimbledon final that is already covered in the 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles article. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Tennis, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:05, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is the same issue for the 2024 Wimbledon Championships Men's Singles final page, not notable at all and a run of the mill match, should also be deleted. A page doesn't need to made for every final played. Reaper1945 (talk) 19:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Boy that's for sure... that article is even worse than this one and maybe it's why this one was created. They thought it was normal. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not as notable or epic as their French Open final showdown a month earlier. Avatar5991 (talk) 03:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not seeing any valid arguments for deletion. Apart from some tennis wikiproject conventions; what is the actual argument for deletion here? Clearly widely reported on with significant coverage in many reliable sources. Alternatively merge to obvious target 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 17:37, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There will always be coverage for any final in any tournament but that is what we put in the 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles article. We don't needed an extra housekeeping page just for a final. When it is something spectacular, sure, since folks and historians will be talking about it for years. But this is a routime finals that is already covered in another article. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:31, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the practical reason for your opinion, though I would still say objectively the final it is a notable topic. I could understand why some may think WP:ROUTINE would apply. When you say it's already covered in the other article- only the result is mentioned, no background or context, as far as I can see. Therefore I think that merge is more understandable than outright deletion.. Heavy Grasshopper (talk) 10:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is the first time since 2008 that same two players were at the finals of Roland Garros and Wimbledon, one won by Alcaraz, the other one won by Sinner, which makes it notable for their rivalry. Plus, it reminds of the Federer-Nadal rivalry in most ways, such as the long-winning streak of Alcaraz against Sinner (0-5), and revenge by Sinner on grass court. Even though this final might not be classified as one of the greats, several other final pages still exist to this day and each of them has their own reason and significance just like this one. It does not need to be an all-time classic. I don't think it is a big necessity to go delete them all of a sudden. Enigmationn (talk) 08:11, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The further I think about it, this match kinda is like the parabola of the French Open, and also historically marked the first time Alcaraz lost his first final much like how Sinner lost his first a month ago. Not fair to delete. - BlitzPhoenix98; 16:37, 21 July 2025 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlitzPhoenix98 (talk • contribs)

Delete - does not meet WikiProject Tennis's match requirements, which also asks users to "consult WP:TENNIS before creating such articles". The match additionally is unlikely to meet the lasting significance criterion for event notability. Previous two keep votes seem to be based on emotion, rather than policy or citations that prove its significance. --Iiii I I I (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Bog-standard final already covered adequately in the tournament articles. Does not need a stand alone article. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 08:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Now it has turned into that every time there is an Sinner-Alcaraz GS final, a page will be created based on "this is a part of Alcaraz–Sinner rivalry". WP:NOTINHERITED. Also, the quality of this article is not up to the standard like 2012 Australian Open – Men's singles final. Actually, most matches listed at Category:Tennis matches at Grand Slam tournaments, should consider AFDs. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 redirect‎ to 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles. Content is saved in the page history if any editor wants to Merge the content. Also, do not use AI for talk page comments, it pretty much makes other editors ignore what points you are trying to make. User your own words, not a bot's. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:53, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles final

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

We aren't supposed to create final match articles for every major.... (8x per year for singles). It is supposed be for those matches that are considered the most amazing of all time. This was 6–0, 6–0 for goodness sake, an abysmal match! One player barely showed up. All of this can easily fit on 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles... most already is there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennis-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:53, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Are there any policies or guidelines relating to this deletion nomination? Thincat (talk) 20:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What usually happens per Tennis Project would be we start with a player bio and when that gets too unwieldy we split off a player stats article. With something like Wimbledon we have the Wimbledon Championships article, yearly articles like 2025 Wimbledon Championships, and then articles on the specific yearly discipline such as 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles. That is normal for all tennis tournaments including the four Grand Slam tournaments. Sometimes we include a truly special match that has many sources as one of the greatest of all-time, such as 2012 Australian Open – Men's singles final. This match was 6–0, 6–0. Anisimova was absolutely awful.... nerves and out of gas per her press briefings. Why on earth would we have a stand-alone article on that? There's nothing to see but a train wreck. However, Tennis Project Guidelines tell us: Notability - "If it's a match: Matches that deserve their own articles on Wikipedia are those that have received significant coverage compared to other tennis matches at a similar level, such as matches of record-setting events or matches with significant controversies." While this match was a record, only three major finals in 148 years of tennis have been 6–0, 6–0, it's on the bad side. The other two double bagel matches do not have such articles. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd say this match should not have a separate article per those guidelines. This match did not get considerably more significant coverage than other matches of the tournament like say the semifinals or even the doubles final.T v x1 10:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge No reason this can't be covered in 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles. Being the final match does not inherently mean it needs a standalone article. Reywas92^Talk 05:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And actually everything here is already in the 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles except the statistics chart is triple the size. I posted this as delete because I felt it had no place as a standalone article, but because this was an unusually lopsided match, I have no issue if that expanded stats chart merges into the main article. I'm not sure it really tells us anything other than it was a rout, but I wouldn't have said anything if it was there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unneccesary content fork.T v x1 10:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Would've said delete if this were a routine GS final, but, as pointed out above, this was only the third double-bagel GS final in tennis history, so it likely meets the notability criteria and therefore warrant a page, subject to the quality of the article. Unfortunately, the current version does not satisfy this standard. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The scoreline alone does not justify the article. The amount of independent coverage does and this final just didn’t get that much. T v x1 21:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which is what I said "subject to the quality of the article". Unnamelessness (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it does meet the notability criteria regardless of the quality. A scoreline does not determine whether it meets these guidelines. Coverage does. This is why we don’t have an article on the Graf Zvereva final either… T v x1 08:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does. The scoreline decides this match received its coverage on how one-sided/rare this match was, and therefore could warrant a page. The Graf-Zvereva final could also receive a page, as long as there are enough WP:RS to cover the story. Unnamelessness (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Objection to deletion proposition

This page should not be deleted, for those reasons:

First, this is clearly not a common or normal final if only three major finals ended with 6/ 6/0, so it is impossible to even consider as that, if this is a massive rare occurrence

Second, it featured two players that never had reached the Wimbledon final, so it is an first time occurrence and again not just like any other final

Third, the allegations of “ We are creating final match articles for every major” is false. If you look up, you will find out that surprisingly the vast majority of articles about major finals are of the men’s singles draw and that there are only three about Women's singles finals, including this one and the use of the argument that “The other two double bagel matches do not have such articles” as a reason to delete can be easily dismissed because editors prefer most of the time to write about more recent events or events that have more easily accessible sources, those two finals fall exactly under that

Fourth, the match wad described by media as “the most one-sided final in 114 years”, so again a massive rare occurrence and with a source to back it up for it’s importance.

Fifth, several grand slam finals articles are on existence and many of them do not have any statements from the press describing as the greatest matches of all time or something similar and nobody is opposing their existence as separated articles.

last, merging with the article about the woman’s draw would make it a unnecessary long article and would “hide” those information, making harder to find for people that want to read about the final only Haddad Maia fan (talk) 18:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Haddad Maia Fan (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AFD. [reply]

Unfortunately, nothing of your statement is an argument per Wikipedia’s guidelines and policies justifying this article. T v x1 21:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While notable for only the third double bagel to occur in a Major final (and first since 1988), I don't think it warrants a standalone article. Avatar5991 (talk) 03:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles per WP:ATD-R. --Mika1h (talk) 18:07, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles as a valid ATD. The finals are covered at the page for the singles championships, so this sends readers to the area on Wikipedia where this topic is covered. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 20:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not violate any policy of Wikipedia, and does not meet the deletion criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.172.183.76 (talk) 06:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With this being one of only three double-bagal Grand Slam finals out of the hundreds played, it seems worth a stand alone article and it has SIGCOV all of which focuses heavily on the unusual scoreline. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 08:33, 22 July 2025 (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.

Wrestling

OVW Kentucky Heavyweight Championship

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

No notable pro wrestling title. OVW is a regional promotion. There are no sources about. Every source is Cagematch (WP:ROUTINE), which is a database and doesn't prove notability. The title was active for a few years and zero of the title holders have article. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wrestling and Kentucky. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ohio Valley Wrestling per WP:CHEAP. This is obviously more of the trend of trying to define what's notable at the expense of trying to reflect what's notable. Otherwise, a bold redirection could have saved a lot of time here. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 07:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OVW Hardcore Championship

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

No notable pro wrestling title. It lasted less than a year, OVW was a regional promotion. We shouldn't create an article for every regional/independent championship. Barely mentions even in reliable sources. [87] HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment BTW, WP:NOTINHERITED, in case someone says "it's a title created by notable promotion Ohio Valley Wrestling" or "the title was held by Randy Orton". --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:03, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:50, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josef Schmidt (wrestler)

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

Subject doesn't meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV, and is also a WP:BLP1E considering the entire basis for notability is participating at a single Olympic games. The only reference currently is a database and I can't find anything better for this subject to meet the notability guidelines (with the name not helping searching efforts). Austria at the 1948 Summer Olympics may be a suitable WP:ATD. Let'srun (talk) 00:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Wrestling, and Austria. Let'srun (talk) 00:00, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Austria at the 1948 Summer Olympics – yet another LUGSTUB. 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 12:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ernest Bacon

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

Unable to be PROD'd because of inclusion in a mass nomination from 2021 which was withdrawn. GNG fail so far - no sigcov hits on Google for the specific person in question so far InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Wrestling, and United Kingdom. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:24, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please slow down. The number of Olympic AFDs right now is absolutely ludicrous and prevents anyone from giving them adequate searches. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:26, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lost cause. Svartner (talk) 07:02, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The earlier failed mass bundled nomination was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Davis (wrestler). (No opinion on this article or the current quantity of Olympian AfDs.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Correct - and the withdrawal seemed to be based on a former NSPORT revision which made all Olympic competitors automatically notable for their own article. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment– How sad it must be to have 2 of your 3 brothers have better Wikipedia pages than you. I feel for the guy. No strong opinion on deletion. – Ike Lek (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Great Britain at the 1924 Summer Olympics: Unable to find any WP:SIGCOV on newspapers.com or google. Perhaps there is something out there but without significant coverage, we can't have an article. Let'srun (talk) 02:51, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:58, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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 redirect‎ to Turkey at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Wrestling. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 17:25, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fuat Akbaş

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

Unable to be PROD'd because of inclusion in a mass nomination from 2021 which was withdrawn. GNG fail so far - no sigcov hits on Google. Tried searching the Cumhiyet archives also, unable to access those so there may be potential searching there, but from what I could access on my end, nothing. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:32, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Wrestling, and Turkey. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:32, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Turkey at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Wrestling – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 07:00, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Turkey at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Wrestling: The only references are databases, and I couldn't find anything better to support notability. Appears to be a WP:BIO1E. Let'srun (talk) 18:44, 19 July 2025 (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.

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 redirect‎ to France at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Wrestling. Owen× ☎ 14:36, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaston Fichu

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

Unable to be PROD'd because of inclusion in a mass nomination from 2021 which was withdrawn. GNG fail so far - no sigcov hits on Google, no SIGCOV hits on RetroNews (a French searchable archive of tons of newspapers, as every single mention of him explicitly I found is only a passing or database-like mention), and nothing else SIGCOV so far. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, Wrestling, and France. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to France at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Wrestling – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 06:58, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to France at the 1924 Summer Olympics#Wrestling: Unable to find any WP:SIGCOV on the corresponding wikis or elsewhere. Let'srun (talk) 21:41, 21 July 2025 (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.

GAY World Anal Championship

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

Absurd subject matter aside, this article has zero independent or secondary sources, apart from a few in German and Japanese but not enough, and thus fails WP:GNG. Lemonademan22 (talk) 08:02, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 July 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sexuality and gender, Wrestling, and Japan. Skynxnex (talk) 16:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Impossible to do a WP:BEFORE about this tournament. Svartner (talk) 04:10, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep' Bad rationale for deletion. Article subjects can be absurd and foreign-language sources go towards WP:GNG.LM2000 (talk) 00:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Whatever the case, there's still a lack of independent sources here. Lemonademan22 (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per LM2000. GaryColemanFan (talk) 03:13, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say Keep (per LM) and also... WTF??? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per LM2000. Additionally, I can further support it with some of the English-language sources i have found: 1; 2; 3.Aeon Sentinel (talk) 15:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as I see a challenge on a purported lack of independent sources that most of the keep !votes haven't addressed. A review of Aeon Sentinel's sources may be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sportspeople

[1] Miller, Scott (2024-06-02), "Kiwi-NRL Spotlight: The Preston Riki Debut For Panthers", The Niche Cache, archived from the original on 2025-07-13, retrieved 2025-07-13

[2] Hamilton, Robbie (2024-05-29), "Preston Riki scores big with Panthers debut tears | LeagueNews.co", LeagueNews.co, retrieved 2025-07-13

[3] Blyth, Jack (2025-07-13), "WATCH: Preston Riki’s run sets up Jordan for stellar Māori try", Zero Tackle, retrieved 2025-07-13

[4] Nicolussi, Christian (2024-05-31), "Meet the rookies hoping to keep the Penrith Panthers juggernaut going", The Sydney Morning Herald, retrieved 2025-07-13

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]