Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bilal Sayoud

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. Consensus that WP:GNG is not met, and some doubts about WP:NFOOTY as well. Note that WP:NSPORTS (of which WP:NFOOTY is a section) states, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. ansh 666 06:16, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bilal Sayoud

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

Scrapes a pass at NFOOTY but fails GNG. One substitute appearance is unlikely to generate sufficient coverage to pass GNG which trumps topic specific criteria. A case of WP: TOOSOON Domdeparis (talk) 23:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not going to vote in this case, but there are some sources where is either partially the subject of the source ([1] and [2]) and where he is the main subject of the source ([3]). If you look, you'll note it's not a mere passing mention, the article is about two footballers, of which the subject here is one of the footballers in question on the article. ^{My name is}not^dave (talk/contribs) 07:45, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The source is nothing more than a report of a quote from the boss of the club he plays for, to the official site of the club he plays for, and to be perfectly honest when you look at it, it is neither in-depth coverage nor from secondary sources. Domdeparis (talk) 08:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:FOOTY and made his debut only last month on 4 October 2017 and currently plays for a fully professional league team .SNGs including WP:FOOTY exist to provide for the inclusion of certain defined subjects that cannot immediately be shown to pass GNG. An SNG provides for a presumption of notability, not a presumption of non-notability An SNG cannot be used to exclude/delete an article when the subject passes GNG, but the reverse is patently absurd because that would negate the entire reason for the existence of SNGs particularly for a player currently playing and only 20 years old.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SNG are there to avoid speedy and prodding. In the FAQs on the NSPORT page it states "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 reliable sources are available, given sufficient time to locate them.[1][2][3][4] Wikipedia's standard for including an article about a given person is not based on whether or not he/she has attained certain achievements, but on whether or not the person has received appropriate coverage in reliable sources, in accordance with the general notability guideline. Also refer to Wikipedia's basic guidance on the notability of people for additional information on evaluating notability." My point is that one substitute appearance is unlikely to have generated any sources so even given sufficient time to search they will not be found. Domdeparis (talk) 10:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So to resume, it is WP:TOOSOON. This may be his last appearance for a professional club; We do not create articles just because we suspect that a subject will become notable, this is an encyclopedia and not a crystal ball. if you like maybe a redirect to the club so as not to lose the history but there is no reason to leave the article as it is I believe...but I have been wrong before! Domdeparis (talk) 11:16, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes NFOOTY, has played senior international football, in a fully professional league or in a match in the competition proper (i.e. not qualifying rounds) of a cup competition which involved two teams both from FPLs. Fenix down (talk) 11:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - A few minutes of play in a cup competition is the narrowest way to satisfy NFOOTBALL, and a review of online sources indicates there is no chance this article would pass the GNG. There is a long-standing precedent at AfD to delete articles like this (e.g., recently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wouter Soomer). We should not use WP:CRYSTAL to argue that this footballer will eventually play more minutes of professional football and have a career significant enough to have GNG-compliant sourcing. If it happens, the article can obviously be re-created. Jogurney (talk) 16:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete total failure to pass general notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:49, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete changed vote. I don't think that an EFL Trophy match qualifies for the SNG; 2017–18 EFL Trophy says that it includes Premier League and Championship "B Teams". power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:22, 12 November 2017 (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.