Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conan Byrne

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. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conan Byrne[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)

Footballer who fails WP:NFOOTY --BlameRuiner (talk) 13:57, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:20, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep he fails WP:NFOOTY but passes WP:GNG as he has received significant coverage as a long-standing notable player in the League of Ireland. Not enough time to paste all the sources but [1] [2] SportingFlyer talk 05:20, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per SportingFlyer, NFOOTY (or other NBIO guidelines) are not considered in isolation. WP:GNG does seem to be met here. While much of the news and RS mentions are of the "trivial mentions in match reports" variety, there are also more than a few examples of coverage in independent sources where the subject is the primary topic. Recommend keeping. Guliolopez (talk) 09:01, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not enough to meet GNG, most coverage is routine and in tabloids. Giant Snowman 11:30, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added a couple more sources to the article about his 100th League of Ireland goal (scored from inside his own half) and his non-football work in Zambia. As noted WP:GNG is passed but common sense says it'd be ridiculous to delete an article about a well-documented footballer with a number of domestic trophies and over 500 total appearances (leading scorer on a championship-winning side), including several in European qualifying rounds, while we keep articles for players who make one appearance in the English fourth division. SportingFlyer talk 12:46, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - definitely fails NFOOTY, but I think the sourcing is just enough to pass GNG. With the number of honours Byrne has won, it seems likely that more sources would exist as well, whether in print or online. 21.colinthompson (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I am going to say weak keep also, the sourcing is a bit poor, but what pushed me was the coverage for his goal of the season got picked up by a few news networks as noted. Could do with a few more citations to push him over WP:GNG and I think that can easily be done despite them being WP:LOCAL or WP:ROUTINE. Govvy (talk) 09:29, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fails WP:NFOOTY but scrapes through WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:05, 15 October 2018 (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.