Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Niyonsaba

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. MBisanz ^talk 13:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Niyonsaba[edit]

Footballer has not played senior international, olympic or fully professional match, generally accepted as minimum criteria for notability of Association football players per WP:ATHLETE or WP:FOOTYNClubOranje^Talk 10:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions.
Delete. Don't you just hate it when perfectly good (and seconded) PRODs are removed by anonymous users for no reason? Neither the NZ Football League nor the NCAA are fully professional so he fails WP:ATHLETE, no sources are given to suggest he would pass WP:BIO, and he has acheived nothing of note to pass WP:N. Bettia (rawr!) 11:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and second Bettia's note about the prod removal - shouldn't be allowed without a rationale. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 11:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Giant Snowman 13:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Govvy (talk) 21:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non-notable youth football player. I disagree with Bettia and #57 about the prod removal though. It's not good form to remove the prod without rationale, agreed, but I see no ground for disallowing it. Apparently someone objects to deletion. We've got AFD to assess whether the objections are valid. If there is no ground for keeping the article, it will get deleted anyway, regardless of the route. The article might be on Wikipedia a few days longer, but is that such a bad thing? Aecis·(away) ^talk 14:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as he is a non-notable youth player. Maybe we need to publicise WP:N and WP:ATHLETE more. DeMoN2009 11:47, 1 February 2009 (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.