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 redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics#France (Mixed Team). WP:V, a core policy, provides: "If no reliable, independent sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." In this AfD, it is not contested that nothing is known about this man, not even his first name, except that he played in an Olympic rugby match. It is therefore not possible to write a WP:V-compliant biographical article about him. The "keep" opinions that only make reference to notability guidelines that establish a mere presumption of notability must be disregarded because they do not address the actual sourcing situation as established in this AfD. That a redirect is a reasonable alternative to deletion is not contested. Sandstein 09:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amended to delete: I overlooked that there were reasonable arguments against a redirect. We don't therefore have consensus for one. People are free to create and then to contest such a redirect. Sandstein 16:38, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A. Albert[edit]

A. Albert (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)

Fails WP:GNG as it lacks WP:SIGCOV, and none was identifiable. Further, it is unlikely that significant coverage can ever be identified, as all we know about him is that he competed as part of the winning French team in the 1900 Summer Olympics, that his last name was Albert, and that his first initial was A. BilledMammal (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby union-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete we really know nothing about this person. The 1904 Olympics were more just an addition to the 1904 WOrld's Fair then a true Olympics. Inclusion criteria also do not overcome the need for articles to meet GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As a gold medal winner, he passes the updated version of the WP:NOLYMPICS guidelines. At worst this page should be redirected to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 21:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect, per above. GNG is hardly to be expected for Olympians in this era. JoelleJay (talk) 02:58, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, gold medal winner clearly notable.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • How, exactly. What sources do we have that constitute Sigcov? It is time we stop falling back on unwaranted sports notability guidelines. The evidence is very clear that there were times when Olympic gold medal winners did not recieve sufficient coverage to justify articles. The allowance of notability for all gold medal winners was not based on actual evidence there was in general sourcing to justify articles, and so it is a very bad SNG. Also, the guidelines on sports SNGs make it clear that to actually justify keeping an article the subject still has to meet GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:07, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and do not redirect We don't even have this person's full name, and we're supposed to believe he gets an insta-exemption from passing GNG? No way. Now, the issue is that A) Rugby is a teamsport, so coverage of individual team-members is not 100% guaranteed and B) "Albert" is a common enough name that it's both B1) fruitless trying to find sources for this without access to specialist sources, as any search is likely to yield way too many false positives and B2) it would not necessarily mean that readers are actually looking for this specific person (Albert André could be a plausible target, if someone for some reasons got the two names there in the wrong order; and of course Albert (surname) lists at least two other persons who could reasonably be the target). And of course Even the Olympedia database used a source quite frankly says that "little is known about him". While NOLYMPICS might be a better guideline than it was before, it is still not in and of itself a criterion for inclusion (as the answer to the FAQ on NSPORTS says, GNG still needs to be met), and here there are good reasons to think that it is unlikely for GNG to be met, in this case even more than the mere age of the subject. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding redirects, one of those at the disambiguation page is also referred to as A. A. Albert, and a A. Albert Yuzpe also exists. I don't think we can reasonably redirect this page. BilledMammal (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep passes WP:ANYBIO as a gold medal is "a well-known and significant award or honor." There is no doubt that the subject received the medal WP:V. --Enos733 (talk) 18:28, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Did you even read the darn page you're citing? "People are likely to be notable if, not "guaranteed". This is a fine counter-example... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:55, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Rugby union at the 1900 Summer Olympics Normally I'd argue that winning the first ever gold medal in Rugby in the Olympics, not only clearly meets the recently tightened WP:NOLYMPICS but is also a very clear pass of WP:NRUGBY. But we can't even identify the player's name here! But given that numerous sources list him as A. Albert it's very reasonable that it could be a search term, and redirect seems obvious to me. Nfitz (talk) 21:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per RandomCanadian. Evidently fails GNG. Avilich (talk) 02:35, 8 February 2022 (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.