Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Berry (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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:12, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

John Berry (footballer)

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

There is only one source (the Player's Transfer Database) that indicates that Mr. Berry ever played a single game for Torquay United FC, and that source gives no indication of where this information came from. There are no hits for John Berry in any other football database I've checked, including footballdatabase.com, footballdatabase.eu, soccerbase.com. World Football Net's list of former Torquay players doesn't show him, and neither does a general search of the same site. So basically, we have a person whose claim to notability cannot be sufficiently verified.

Even if we operate under the assumption that he did play once and therefore passes WP:NFOOTY, the recent RfC on the matter affirmed that "no subject-specific notability guideline, including Notability (sports) is a replacement for or supercedes the General Notability Guideline," so Mr. Berry still needs to pass the WP:GNG.

I did an absolutely thorough BEFORE check using the links suggested in {{find sources}}, adding "Torquay", "gulls", and "football" in various combinations, and located absolutely no sources so much as even mentioning Mr. Berry, let alone going in-depth enough to pass GNG. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - meets WP:NFOOTBALL per the source above and this, but there is plenty of consensus that passing NFOOTBALL when you fail GNG is not enough (see Oscar Otazu, Vyacheslav Seletskiy, Aleksandr Salimov, Andrei Semenchuk, Artyom Dubovsky, Cosmos Munegabe, Marios Antoniades, Scott Sinclair, Fredrik Hesselberg-Meyer, Matheus Eccard, Roland Szabó (2nd nomination), Metodija Stepanovski, Linas Klimavičius, Takumi Ogawa, Nicky Fish,Andrei Nițu and Mohammed Al-Jizani, amongst others). For younger players we usually allow a grace period to get some coverage, but that doesn't apply here as he is long retired. I suggest we redirect to Torquay United F.C., as his sole claim to fame is playing for them - and then redirect to 1983–84 Torquay United F.C. season once that has been created. Giant Snowman 08:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This pretty clearly falls under the section the lede of WP:NSPORT which says: the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. (Emphasis original.) As GiantSnowman has already demonstrated above there is a fairly strong consensus against keeping articles on footballers who only just meet WP:NSPORT, when that is unlikely to change and they clearly fails WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - one appearance a number years ago (to technically meet NFOOTY) is not enough when he comprehensively fails GNG. Some COMMONSENSE is needed here, and plenty of AFD precedent exists to say that barely passing NFOOTBALL is not enough when you fail GNG. Disagree with the idea of redirecting as there is no mention of him in the club article. Fenix down (talk) 08:33, 17 July 2017 (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.