Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack McBean

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. Courcelles 21:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jack McBean[edit]

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

Fails WP:FOOTYN for me, hasn't played a competitive football match at senior level, so doesn't meet any criteria there. Cloudz679 (talk) 14:20, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - WP:NFOOTY states that youth players can be notable if they are shown to meet the wider requirements of WP:GNG. I believe that McBean meets GNG due to the extent of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources (BBC, ESPN, LA Times, Daily Mail and others) for more than one event. My understanding is that WP:FOOTYN is not to be used as a guideline, but in any case that also states that any player may still be notable under GNG. Deserter1 14:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 14:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Fails WP:NFOOTY but in my opinion passes GNG. Warburton1368 (talk) 14:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a case of WP:BLP1E I reckon i.e. all the media attention is about his nationality, nothing substantial or of note. GiantSnowman 14:56, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- How is his nationality "one event"? Jenks24 (talk) 12:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly has coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. This seems to constitute more than WP:ROUTINE coverage. Adam4267 (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep obviously fails WP:NFOOTBALL but passes WP:GNG (★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★) 16:11, 11 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Delete. WP:BLP1E failure. Argyle 4 Life^talk 17:04, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys I'm asking permission to vote at this AfD, as I'm told I need to discuss all edits on Scottish football before making them. Would anyone object terribly if I voted? Obviously I would hate to cause any disruption. PorridgeGobbler (talk) 18:32, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No objection I see no reason as to why you cannot vote/comment here. Adam4267 (talk) 18:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Lots of coverage in reliable sources but mostly for Levein's comments. PorridgeGobbler (talk) 19:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this should be kept because he seems quite notable to me. Tony (talk) 17:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, mainly per Deserter. While he clearly fails WP:NFOOTY (a section of WP:NSPORTS), the lead paragraph of NSPORTS clearly states that a person can still be notable per GNG, whether they meet NSPORTS or not. As is shown by the references in the article and by clicking the news link above, McBean has received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources (and major international sources, not just the local paper) and clearly meets the general notability guideline. How his nationality is considered "one event" is beyond me. Jenks24 (talk) 12:54, 15 August 2011 (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.