Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jajang (footballer)

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. ✗plicit 23:51, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jajang (footballer)

[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 played 3 games in January 2013 then his career seemingly ended as there is no indication anywhere of any ongoing career. In the context of the Asuka Nose AfD, where a footballer with 6 professional games was deleted, I would argue that a footballer with 3 games should also be deleted unless any significant coverage is found to indicate, at the very least, a likelihood of passing WP:GNG. Searches such as this one yield only coverage about footballers with similar names such as Jajang Mulyana, Jajang Sukmara and Jajang Nurjaman all of whom warrant articles. There is nothing at all about this Jajang, though, and even the other language Wikipedia articles for Jajang have no meaningful content so I can't see this article having any potential to be anything more than a Soccerway mirror. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:54, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:55, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:55, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:55, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Nomination --dashiellx (talk) 21:09, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is longstanding consensus that scraping by on NFOOTBALL with one or two appearances is insufficient when GNG is failed so comprehensively, as is the case here. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 09:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:NFOOTY. How do we count scraping by? Sure, players with one minute of professional play could be counted as "scraping by" but three or six matches? At the top of WP:N it says an article is presumed notable if it passes GNG or an SNG, what is the point of having NFOOTY if we don't follow it? NemesisAT (talk) 11:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like you say it is presumed, but here the presumption is challenged, and the community is asked to concretize what might be encyclopedic about Jajang. The precedent is pretty ample. Geschichte (talk) 19:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We could also ask the question "What is the point of having GNG if we don't follow it?" There is plenty of consensus that articles on footballers with a handful of appearances several years ago but who comprehensively fail GNG should be deleted. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masaya Sato (footballer, born 1989) (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junichi Watanabe (footballer, born 1988) (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryuki Matsuya and others. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per above, this is also stated at WP:WINNEROUTCOMES. GauchoDude (talk) 16:39, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. NSPORT is explicitly subordinate to GNG in all cases, whether someone meets a sport-specific guideline or "barely scrapes by". This is in the first sentence of NSPORT, in the FAQs at the top of the page, and in the first section (where it says In addition, the subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline. The guideline on this page provides bright-line guidance to enable editors to determine quickly if a subject is likely to meet the General Notability Guideline.). Therefore, given the lack of SIGCOV, the subject does not meet the requirements for notability. JoelleJay (talk) 20:27, 8 December 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.