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. This one was a close call, and neither side of the debate on the sources really seems to have convinced the other of anything, but opinion since the article was expanded on 8 March looks to have shifted towards a consensus to keep. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jakub Kaszuba[edit]

Jakub Kaszuba (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Not notable and doesn't pass GNG HeinzMaster (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Poland. HeinzMaster (talk) 01:16, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I tend to think we have too many catalogue-entries for minor sportspeople. He played in Ekstraklasa (top level in Poland), but I think this might no longer be sufficient? Pl. wiki article does not cite any media coverage, I could probably dig something up but I am not motivated. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:13, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - @Piotrus:, I found [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10],[11], [12], and [13], among many more Polish sources. Made 29 appearances and scored 4 goals for fully pro Polish top flight team. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 19:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Some of this is niche (perhaps even fan-based), but an interview in Gazeta Krakowska is an evidence of some visiblity. Still, WP:INTERVIEWS are not high-quality sourcing. Bt to see he is not notable, well, the nom should now criticize the sources if they still disagree. Coverage has been found, not great but not a joke either. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:18, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. 1 is a brief mention in a match recap, N. 2 is a short blurb in a "where are they now" niche publication piece on Young Ekstraklasa players, N. 3 is somewhat better, but is primarily focused on details of a transfer agreement between two clubs rather than direct coverage of Kaszuba, N. 4 is an interview with some independent coverage, but it doesn't seem to be enough for GNG, N. 5 is a pure Q&A interview, N. 6 is another "where are they now" blurb with just a few sentences on him, N. 7 is another Q&A interview, N. 8 is yet another "WaTN" blurb lamenting his failed potential, N. 9 is a tiny routine transaction announcement, why would you even include this? N 10 is a Q&A interview, N. 11–13 are articles straight from his club, obviously not independent, N. JoelleJay (talk) 08:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per sources above which show notability. GiantSnowman 10:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the sources above. #4 absolutely has enough non-interview content to be considered GNG-passing. In addition to that, WP:ANYBIO allows that if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. I believe there is enough non-trivial mentions along with the one GNG-passing source to allow for an article on this subject. Frank Anchor 17:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Frank Anchor, that interview comes from ASInfo, which has the Polish Football Association (PZPN) as a PR/marketing client and thus is not independent. JoelleJay (talk) 23:20, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Odd, because you specifically said it’s is an interview with some independent coverage. In my opinion there is enough independent coverage here. Frank Anchor 23:36, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That was my assessment before I noticed the byline at the bottom. I still disagree that it is sufficient coverage for GNG, but that's now irrelevant since it's not independent. JoelleJay (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kaszuba has played for at least four clubs overseen at the time by PZPN. And I don't see how any of those other sources satisfy the SPORTSBASIC SIGCOV requirements. JoelleJay (talk) 09:05, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, that is a HUGE stretch to say that is not an independent source since Mr. Kaszuba is not directly affiliated with the Polish FA (having no caps for the national team). That would be the equiilent of saying an ESPN article on an NBA player is not independent because ESPN has a media agreement with the NBA, and the thought of that being a non-independent source is simply laughable. However, with or without this as an independent source, there is still enough to pass ANYBIO. Frank Anchor 13:11, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A media agreement, where a news org is given direct press access to or exclusive coverage of events from a sports org, is different from the sports org being a PR client of an intermediary that produces articles for the sports org to distribute to the media. AFAIK the NBA does not have legal editorial control over what ESPN reports, whereas ASInfo is explicitly "[creating] PR information with great potential for publication in the media with a large reach." That is not an independent relationship. And I still do not see where you are finding he meets NBASIC. JoelleJay (talk) 18:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what non-independent means. Ortizesp (talk) 09:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 09:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Article fails WP:GNG; I cannot find in-depth coverage online - in fact Gazeta Krakowska has a blurb that sums up his career pretty well: "w seniorskiej piłce nie był skuteczny." ("in senior football, he wasn't effective"). There just isn't anything available that would be significant coverage. Jogurney (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the 13 sources I found above, I also found [14], [15], [16] and [17], among more Polish sources. Made 29 appearances and scored 4 goals for fully pro Polish top flight team and has extensive career in Polish lower leagues. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 18:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. 14 is passing mentions in routine match coverage, #15 is routine transfer coverage with barely 2 sentences on him, #16 is passing mentions in routine match coverage, #17 is more routine transfer coverage. Why would you link these? JoelleJay (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shawn Teller (talk) 01:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:GNG, analysis of sources by JoelleJay clearly shows this. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timothytyy (talk) 04:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I found 17+ sources above, many of which focus on Kaszuba or write about his career, with many more Polish sources on the internet I haven't listed here,. Made 29 appearances and scored 4 goals for fully pro Polish top flight team and also played in pro Polish lower leagues. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 19:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  You found 17 sources that do not provide IRS SIGCOV, why should we trust your opinion that there are "many more Polish sources" out there over Jogurney's, especially when your !vote match rate across hundreds of athlete AfDs is nearly 40 percentage points lower than theirs? JoelleJay (talk) 20:26, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Amen Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:33, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other editors and I disagree with your opinion that the 17 sources do not provide IRS SIGCOV, as shown in the keep votes above (which outnumber the delete votes). Its fine, we can agree to disagree. Also, I have just spent an hour doing a WP:HEY and vastly expanded the article with the sources. WP:HEY states that it can be "invoked during deletion discussions to point out that an article has been significantly improved since it was nominated for deletion". Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 00:41, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the posted sources above establish notability. I disagree with JoelleJay’s analysis of the sources no matter how much WP:BLUDGEONing this user does to try to get their point across. Specifically, there is enough non-routine coverage and I consider the ASInfo page to be far enough removed from the subject to be independent therefore passing GNG. Carson Wentz (talk) 03:03, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Meets WP:GNG.KatoKungLee (talk) 13:50, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I agree with the assessment on the above the sources that they fail to establish that the subject passes GNG. Alvaldi (talk) 19:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - if this guy had been American and played a single game of pro-football or baseball in 1901 there would be a clamour of keep !votes with far less sourcing than this. I say if that's the standard we are working to, then everyone who ever played major sports at major teams are notable. JMWt (talk) 07:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thats simply not true, the standard is clear per WP:NSPORTS, pass GNG or GT*O. Those who do not pass GNG regularly get deleted or redirected, see recent examples of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Babcock, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marv Smith, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Comer (American football) and notably Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Green. Attemts to game the system, such as by trying to pass dozens of non-sigcov sources as sigcov, will only lead to the Wikipedia community coming down hard on the sports articles. Again. Alvaldi (talk) 08:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I could list many more that have been kept. I'm not gaming any system, as far as I'm concerned, any person that plays sports but is only found as a brief mention in a database is not notable. But that's clearly not the standard in play for many American sports. JMWt (talk) 08:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that any person that plays sports but only has database sources or brief mentions in others is not notable. WP:NSPORTS2022 reaffirmed that athletes need enough SIGCOV to pass GNG for their articles to be kept. Despite that, there have been attempts by many users to bypass that in various ways, some successful and some not, and not just on articles on American athletes, such as the above mentioned. I follow various sport related AfD's, and if anything, American sport related AfD's are not the biggest culprit in the problems we are having with sport related AfD's. And even if that was that was the case, !voting keep here to prove a WP:POINT makes the !voter just as much part of the problem as those attempting to game the system. Alvaldi (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2023 (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.