Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dániel Kákonyi

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:38, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dániel Kákonyi

[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)

Another one where there is some discrepancy over whether he has played that one top tier game or not. Soccerway has him down as playing 90 mins but HLSZ and MLSZ seem to disagree and don't have any top tier appearances listed. He has, however, played in two league cup games so does manage to scrape a WP:NFOOTBALL pass. He is currently playing in the third tier, which isn't professional and hasn't been playing at professional level for 10 years now.

A Hungarian search comes up with nothing better than a brief quote on a football site and a transfer announcement. Everything else, I have discounted as they're just blog posts or database profiles. I'm not seeing WP:GNG being met.

There is a growing consensus that a trivial passing of NFOOTBALL (in this case two confirmed appearances, possibly three but the third being disputed somewhat) is insufficient when GNG is not satisfied. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:25, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:25, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:25, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It seem you really did have a good look for online sources, I had a look and see a lot of profiles and the same stuff you noted. Certainly seems to fails WP:GNG. Govvy (talk) 16:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is plenty of consensus that scraping by on NFOOTBALl with one or two appearances is insufficient when GNG is failed so comprehensively, as is the case here. Please ping me if sources are found. Giant Snowman 17:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per all above, fails WP:GNG. Pilean (talk) 20:12, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is exactly why we need actual passing of GNG to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:39, 18 March 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.