Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brad House

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. Keep arguments based on WP:NFOOTY do not overcome the Delete arguments based on WP:GNG. RL0919 (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Brad House[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)

Non notable football player who fails to meet any criterion from WP:NFOOTY, they had been signed to a tier 1 EPL club-side, but never played any fixture, they currently play for a second division club side thus are not notable. Celestina007 (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. Fails to pass WP:NFOOTY or WP:GNG. Kacamata! ^Dimmi!!! 00:34, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:58, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Soccerbase has two EFL Trophy games that would meet WP:NFOOTBALL #2 Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:00, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the statement "fails to meet any criterion from WP:NFOOTY....currently play for a second division club side thus are not notable" is simply wrong. WP:NFOOTY requires the player to have played in a fully professional league. There is no mention of it needing to be a "tier 1" league. House plays for Sutton United, who play in EFL League Two, which is fully pro -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - player passes WP:NFOOTY having played multiple competitives game between two teams from fully professional leagues -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 31 December 2021
Delete or possibly Draftify; he might become notable in the future, but at present a global encyclopaedia (as opposed to an Anglosphere-only one) simply doesn't need articles like this. RobinCarmody (talk) 14:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Has featured in two EFL Trophy games for Sutton United, against at least two fully professional sides, AFC Wimbledon and Stevenage. Do not understand reason for supposed deletion. Articles such as Eoin McKeown have had no problems with deletion even though this player had featured against an under-23 side. -- Ac2468 (talk) 14:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets NFOOTBALL. Needs improving, not deleting. Giant Snowman 15:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Is currently (not) playing for a fourth tier club and has accrued no coverage to come anywhere close to WP:GNG. RobinCarmody's point about an "Anglosphere" bias running through the WP:SNG is an apposite one here. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - passes WP:NFOOTY and seems notable enough. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 21:33, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Meeting NFOOTY is completely irrelevant once notability is challenged, since all NSPORT subjects must still meet GNG. Since no one has provided sources demonstrating SIGCOV in IRS, there is no guideline-compliant argument for keeping a standalone article on him. JoelleJay (talk) 03:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NFOOTY subject is 23 years old and actively playing see little point in deleting it.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:41, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep nominator seems to be unfamiliar with WP:NFOOTY if "they currently play for a second division club side thus are not notable" - that would result in the deletion of all the Cardiff City pages I see in TFA and DYK so often. Sutton United are in League Two - the fourth division so to speak - which is covered by WP:NFOOTY as is the real "second division" the Championship, where the TV money, attendances and transfers are higher than most foreign top divisions. But going back to this player, he has played two cup games against other professional teams [1] and 23 is a bit young to assume that that's going to be his lot for his career. 2A00:23C5:E187:5F00:A508:D6E9:EC6F:3D8F (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I said two !votes above, NSPORT (which governs NFOOTY) is extremely clear that it is a predictor of GNG and does not grant notability itself. So for this article to be kept, SIGCOV in multiple IRS must be produced. JoelleJay (talk) 01:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 13:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. As noted by JoelleJay, passing NFOOTY is irrelevant as NSPORT makes it very clear that you still have to pass GNG as can been seen in the recent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pete Vainowski. Alvaldi (talk) 08:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Alvaldi: lack of significant coverage, fails WP:GNG. Additionally, even if it were to meet NFOOTY, per WP:SNG, articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found. And neither adequate sourcing nor significant coverage can be found here. Pilaz (talk) 18:05, 13 January 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.