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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:37, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Highfield[edit]

Adam Highfield (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Simione001 (talk) 13:47, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not meet the general notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:05, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:05, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Did he have any appearances for FC Jokerit during 2002 as that club was professional at the time meaning he would meet the notable guidelines? I'm having trouble finding out if he actually played for them though. NZFC^(talk) 20:25, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

One of the contemporary media reports suggest he was playing in the reserve team. Couldn't tell you categorically whether he played first team or not. Hack (talk) 12:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Not many of the articles are publicly available, most likely due to changes in media ownership since the articles were published. Hack (talk) 12:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - possibly meets WP:NFOOTY, but difficult to confirm, lack of available online sources is irritating but I am happy this player passes GNG based on the references in the article. the titles of sources 1 and 2 indicate to me coverage of a non-routine nature, whilst this referenced in the article, is a significant article discussing the career of and speaking with the player himself. The remainder look to me like more routine coverage from their titles, but it seems clear that this player has received a degree of significant coverage over an extended period of time throughout his career. Fenix down (talk) 12:30, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not convinced by arguments for WP:NFOOTBALL (not supported by reliable sources, but especially because Finland was only relatively pro recently IIRC) or WP:GNG (sources don't quite cut the mustard, sorry). GiantSnowman 16:58, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- a BLP that lacks sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail. Coverage is in passing or routine. Does not meet WP:NFOOTY and there's nothing better. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:36, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - as the above two keep !votes state above subject has received enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. Inter&anthro (talk) 21:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Note that the first five sources in the article are all local. J947 ^{(c · m)} 18:47, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• @J947: New Zealand doesn't have national daily newspapers. The New Zealand Herald (Auckland), The Press (Christchurch) and The Dominion Post (Wellington) are the three most widely circulated dailies in the country. Hack (talk) 07:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• @Hack: I'm a New Zealander and The Dominion Post—news found at stuff.co.nz—barely circulates outside the lower North Island; The Press—circulation of roughly 80,000—having a similar issue. In NZ the online version of The New Zealand Herald is the 9th most popular website in the country, just behind stuff.co.nz (#8), despite circulating only much in the upper North Island. Radio New Zealand, Stuff, and some other websites online are national news outlets. Also, daily newspapers aren't the only thing that matters. J947 ^{(c · m)} 18:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I'm not sure what point people are trying to make about "local news". It seems obvious from the sources noted (Dominion Post, NZ Herald, The Press, Stuff.co.nz, etc) that whilst the circulation of the sources may be described as regional at best, the coverage the player has received has been undeniably national, since there are sources published on both main islands included here. Not only has the coverage been widespread geographically across NZ, it also seems from the timing of the sources noted in the article, that it has been sustained over a number of years. Fenix down (talk) 13:14, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Despite there being no indication of WP:NFOOTY and him probably failing it from a first look, there is a whole article about him on stuff.co.nz ([1]). The Press is local as it covers Canterbury, where he plays, but I count them as half a source and those three full articles make it to the threshold even not considering articles in The Dominion Post and The New Zealand Herald, which are not local to Highfield's area as Fenix down correctly notes (silly me). Furthermore, the spread out coverage and having many whole articles written about him strengthens my !vote. J947 ^{(c · m)} 18:57, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep enough references have been identified for WP:GNG to be passed Atlantic306 (talk) 17:08, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. J947 ^{(c · m)} 06:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I am happy that the GNG has been met with suitable, in depth sources, including the one linked to above by Fenix Down, which have a reasonable enough circulation. These do enough to convince me of notability here - I doubt he'll ever be massively notable but there are many sportspeople who would pass SNG but about whom we will be unlikely to ever find the level of substantive sourcing provided here. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep adequately sourced to pass WP:GNG .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:56, 16 December 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.