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. The keeps simply do not provide a strong enough argument to override the claims in the delete votes, namely that there is insufficient coverage that is significant and independent in scope. And to answer a question: No, NFOOTY doesn't not override GNG. GNG is the policy which all sub criteria get their authority from. They are convenient, but GNG is the real line each article must pass. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 00:16, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremiah Arkorful[edit]

Jeremiah Arkorful (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)

This article was restored following a this DRV, a few days ago. Since the last AfD, Arkoful signed for Hajduk Split. However, his only appearance for the Croatian club was a cup match against a lower division team, making it insufficient to meet WP:NSPORT. He then moved to the Latvian top flight, which is not fully pro. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:04, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:04, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 09:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails NFOOTY as has not played or managed senior international football nor played or managed in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Initial DRV request seems to me to be incorrect, as he has never passed any guideline. Fenix down (talk) 11:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, does NFOOTY override GNG? It appears he has been covered significantly by reliable sources. Goal.com, Goal.com, slobodnadalmacija. Is it harder for an African player to make it to senior level, however his league appears to be notable. The ladder source is from Croatia making his coverage international. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 17:15, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first of these links won't load on my end (typo maybe?), and the other two are routine transfer announcements, which are not considered significant coverage. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those might be routine, but the references I put in when I restored the article show that he is getting significant coverage in his own country. I've never understood this NFOOTY criterion of having to be a fully professional player in a fully professional league in order to be notable. Arkorful is clearly a professional player, at least at some point in his career, and I doubt very much that the article of a US amateur sportsman would be deleted just because significant coverage of him was only in the US. SpinningSpark 16:58, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you added were another transfer announcement, which as previously mentioned is not significant, and his Transfermarkt profile. Setting aside that Transfermarkt is user-generated and therefore not a reliable source, as a stats-website, it is arguably even more routine than the others. So much so that WP:NSPORT explicitly says that this type of source cannot be used to establish notability: Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may be used to support content in an article, but it is not sufficient to establish notability. This includes listings in database sources with low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion. Oh and if you're going to insinuate bias, please back it up with something, because American soccer players with similar career paths and levels of coverage will typically be deleted with no questions asked. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:04, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To my mind, routine transfer announcement would be a short sentence like "player x has just signed for y". The goal.com piece, while not lengthy, is more than that. So is this (in Croatian) and the Ghana Sportsonline source talks about his earlier career as well. SpinningSpark 19:32, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may think that, but consensus pretty clearly doesn't support that position. It would be fairly trivial to find similar sources for just about every active footballer deleted by AfD. Every editor regularly involved football related AfD's knows this, and yet these articles were deleted anyway. I can only conclude that this type of coverage is considered insufficient to meet WP:GNG. And with good reason. Transfers in particular are an area where interest of the specialist new media extends well beyond the encyclopedic interest. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:18, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I wasn't going to try defending a lost cause, but as I have now been provoked into responding, then keep. SpinningSpark 16:58, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Article about a footballer who hasn't played in a fully-pro league (has only played one cup match against an amateur side) and isn't the subject of significant coverage in English-, Croatian- or Latvian-language sources as far as I can tell. There are a handful of routine mentions of him (transfer news and stats compiliations), but nothing that rise to the level of satisfying the GNG. Jogurney (talk) 12:25, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I find it strange to say an African player receiving coverage in Croatia and multiple sources from Goal.com as "trivial". Do American players of the similar skill receive the same coverage? NFOOTY is one thing, but he clearly passes GNG, can we provide evidence his coverage is "trivial". Valoem ^{talk contrib} 21:52, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Slobodna Dalmacija article is four sentences - it mentions that he signed a one-year loan deal with Hajduk and made a single cup appearance before being pushed out (i.e., trivial coverage). A Vecernji List article dedicates three sentences to his signing with Hajduk (again, entirely trivial coverage). The Goal.com coverage is trivial as well - more routine transfer news. The bottom line is this footballer hasn't accomplished enough (e.g., making first team appearances with Hajduk) to warrant significant coverage - and nobody has been able to produce it. Please correct me if you can find some. Jogurney (talk) 23:03, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I don't see enough coverage to pass GNG and considering he didn't play a first team league game in Croatia doesn't help. Govvy (talk) 19:21, 8 July 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.