Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Mathews
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. John254 00:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alan Mathews (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Football manager who fails WP:ATHLETE as he has never played or managed in a fully professional league. Was prodded, but prod removed with the claim that the league is fully professional, though this is not the case. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. —Guliolopez (talk) 19:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Per nom. Xeron220 (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - A fully professional manager with a fully professional football club which plays at the highest level in the domestic league (amateur or professional) meets my reading of WP:ATHLETE. Further, the basic WP:BIO criteria of "significant coverage" is substantially met also.[1] Guliolopez (talk) 19:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Being blunt, your reading of it is wrong. The fact that his club is fully professional or in the top division is totally irrelevant; the league itself is not fully professional, and that is what counts in the WP:ATHLETE criteria. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Being equally blunt, I think that you are reading WP:ATHLETE myopically - without consideration to other NN criteria. The broader WP:BIO guidelines state that "Should a person fail to meet these additional criteria [in this case WP:ATHLETE], they may still be notable under WP:N." And it is my contention that Mathews does meet (as above) the general WP:N/WP:BIO criteria of "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". And therefore meets notability overall. Further, I still think that blindly interpreting WP:ATHLETE in a way which precludes professional managers/players in leagues where another club may be semi-pro, (without consideration to the article subject and his/her independent notability) is not appropriate. (If a professional player plays in a professional league, where one other competing team happens to be "semi-pro", that player is automatically NN? Irrespective of the other notability criteria? Seems a little bit too harsh an interpretation to my mind. Which is why the NN criteria are hierarchical. Guliolopez (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Even if he does pass WP:N, this does not change the fact that he fails WP:ATHLETE, which is my point here. Also, it is not blindly applied; there have been numerous discussions at WP:FOOTY on the issue, and in cases where there is just one club (as happens occasionally in the Scottish First Division), or one player (as happened with a Dagenham player in League Two last year), then we do count it as effectively fully professional. However, as the source I provided states, 4 or 5 of the 12 clubs in this league are semi professional, and therefore it is not sensible to call it a fully-professional league. пﮟოьεԻ 57 20:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Being equally blunt, I think that you are reading WP:ATHLETE myopically - without consideration to other NN criteria. The broader WP:BIO guidelines state that "Should a person fail to meet these additional criteria [in this case WP:ATHLETE], they may still be notable under WP:N." And it is my contention that Mathews does meet (as above) the general WP:N/WP:BIO criteria of "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject". And therefore meets notability overall. Further, I still think that blindly interpreting WP:ATHLETE in a way which precludes professional managers/players in leagues where another club may be semi-pro, (without consideration to the article subject and his/her independent notability) is not appropriate. (If a professional player plays in a professional league, where one other competing team happens to be "semi-pro", that player is automatically NN? Irrespective of the other notability criteria? Seems a little bit too harsh an interpretation to my mind. Which is why the NN criteria are hierarchical. Guliolopez (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Being blunt, your reading of it is wrong. The fact that his club is fully professional or in the top division is totally irrelevant; the league itself is not fully professional, and that is what counts in the WP:ATHLETE criteria. пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:32, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Question: Mathews managed Cork City when they played FC Haka in a UEFA Cup tie last month. Would that qualify as participating in a fully professional match and competition? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the UEFA Cup qualifying round has numerous semi-professional clubs in it, from countries such as the Faroes and Iceland. WP:ATHLETE specifically states that the player's club must be in a fully-professional league (otherwise we could end up with articles on non-League players who play against professional clubs in the FA Cup etc). пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually I agree with Number57 on this point. Managing a team that played in the UEFA cup doesn't automatically infer notability on Mathews. For the reasons Number57 notes, and the general problems with the other-side of the "inferred notability" or "notability by association" issue noted above. However, as above, I think he meets WP:N in other ways. Guliolopez (talk) 20:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, the UEFA Cup qualifying round has numerous semi-professional clubs in it, from countries such as the Faroes and Iceland. WP:ATHLETE specifically states that the player's club must be in a fully-professional league (otherwise we could end up with articles on non-League players who play against professional clubs in the FA Cup etc). пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep subject meets the general notability guidelines, plenty of coverage in secondary sources [2]. RMHED (talk) 23:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Passing WP:ATHLETE is generally grounds to keep an article; it is an unacceptable excuse as the sole reason to delete an article. Article provides reliable and verifiable sources to satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 04:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - in my opinion he is notable as a football manager. GiantSnowman 12:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - seems to pass notability guidelines, regardless of managing in amateur league. Quentin X (talk) 23:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Per the above arguments and links. Seems to get past our requirements. rootology (C)(T) 05:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - he may not played or managed at a fully pro level, but I'd say winning the SWAI Personality of the Year would be more than enough to make him notable. Bettia (rawr CRUSH!) 11:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - the manager of a team in the top division in his country certainly seems notable enough to me. Basement12 (T.C) 18:49, 31 August 2008 (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.