Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Keely

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 no consensus. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:29, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Keely[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL JMHamo (talk) 20:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 20:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Hasn't played in Ireland's premier division and is thus not a pass of WP:NFOOTY. nearlyevil 665 20:08, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment wouldn't extensive coverage on a subject's death be considered non-trivial? Nehme₁₄₉₉ 20:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails GNG and NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 20:42, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep fails NFOOTY, but passes GNG, lots of significant and reliable coverage such as this, this, this, and this.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:23, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:BASIC is largely met. While it's not cut-and-dried and though much of the (more recent) coverage of the subject relates to his death, there does appear to be coverage in enough multiple independent sources to demonstrate some notability. It's not black and white, but (in a grey-ish case like this) I would lean more towards a "keep". Guliolopez (talk) 15:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep The article fails NFooty, however I also feel it does qualify under GNG, I agree with Guliolopez comments above. Govvy (talk) 17:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NFOOTBALL. I couldn't find any significant coverage of Keely before his death so he fails GNG. Dougal18 (talk) 09:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - coverage was a bit borderline until his death, but the extensive coverage of his death puts it over the top for GNG. Seems a bit odd to me that this article has been here harmlessly for a decade, but then gets nominated for deletion on the very day he dies. Nfitz (talk) 22:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment People have extensive coverage of their deaths but they still aren't notable for a Wikipedia article. It's why there are "Death of X" articles rather than articles called X. AfD's shouldn't be decided on whether someone's death receives coverage or not. Dougal18 (talk) 10:01, 11 May 2021 (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.