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. Hut 8.5 20:55, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardo Sendra[edit]

Ricardo Sendra (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)

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the articles creator, based on a speculative claim that he will play in a fully pro league in future. Speculation is never grounds for notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete hasn't played in a fully professional league, so fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:18, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 07:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 07:36, 5 April 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. Fenix down (talk) 09:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - now meets NFOOTY. Fenix down (talk) 14:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Clearly fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG as the league he plays in is not fully professional. --Clean-up-wiki-guy (talk) 22:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the above comments and nominator. Never played professionally and speculation does not prove notability. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 20:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails NFOOTY, because not played as fully professional. --Drabdullayev17 (talk) 07:32, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - non-notable footballer. Fails WP:NFOOTYCAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:36, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:NFOOTY at present Atlantic306 (talk) 20:13, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - made his debut for Geylang International FC on April 8 [1] so clearly meets WP:NFOOTYcriteria。47.91.132.79 (talk) 07:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)This comment was left by blocked editor Das osmnezz. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• An IP that's never edited before decides to suddenly come to this discussion? Seems like block evasion to me. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Seems more like a WP:AGF fail to me by User:Joseph2302. Personally, my Internet Provider provides me with a different IP everytime my DSL modem reconnects - so I would appear as a new IP editor if I wasn't logged in. More to the point, the IP editor is 100% correct. Nfitz (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Nfitz The user has admitted on their talkpage that it was them. It was obvious to me that it was the article creator block evading. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Then User:Joseph2302 should have simply stated your suspicions, or at least provided the information that many in this AFD would be aware of, that the creator of the article had been blocked - though the charges seem rather trivial and trumped up given that part of the evidence is the creation of this particular article, that is clearly a keep. It's no wonder we have problems with a diminishing editing base with admins more interested in the persecution and belittling of their peers rather than doing their job and mentoring/guiding editors. I don't see what blocking the creator of this article accomplishes. Even had Sendra not appeared in this game, the media has been clear that he is expected to feature prominently this season [2] - so creation of the article was perfectly reasonable. At the same time, you did fail WP:AGF by not removing your delete vote. And I see little reason for removing the IP's keep vote - it's not like they had participated in this debate under any other persona - and more to the point, they were right, and you were wrong by failing to remove your delete vote, after he notified you of his appearance. Nfitz (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I did change my vote? And you're now supporting block evasion? Ridiculous. If he hadn't made an appearance, he wouldn't have been notable enough. And your dig at admins doesn't work, since I'm not an admin, and clearly your vendetta is against me. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:17, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't initially change your vote when informed that the player had met WP:NFOOTBALL. You only changed it later when it started to look like a snow keep. Block evasion? An IP edit that the editor was honest about? I don't see why the editor shouldn't have some input given the claim of creating the article for a player with no notability was part of the charge in the first place. On paper it's a violation, but an application of WP:CS and WP:IAR, along with the transparency, should set that aside. It's not like they have 2 votes here. And most importantly, they were 100% correct. It's also useful to alerting us to the overzealous administration - though that's hardly an uncommon occurrence here ... Nfitz (talk) 02:44, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - per new evidence. @Sir Sputnik: would you be able to have a look please? It seems reliable. Spiderone 12:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - has recent professional appearance for team listed as fully-professional in WP:FPL. I don't see point of wasting everyone's time with AFDs for players who are about to make their professional debut. We'd be better served if there was some more WP:UCS and WP:WAIT applied to these nominations. Nfitz (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - As nominator. Given that he has now made his debut, the article meets WP:NSPORT. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as they've now played in an FPL. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - has since played for Geylang International FC, thus satisfying WP:NFOOTY by playing in a fully professional league. Hopefully more coverage will now come out to help the article pass WP:GNG as well. Inter&anthro (talk) 14:50, 12 April 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.