Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohamed El Amine Hammia

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. One critical source seems to be about another person entirely. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:12, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed El Amine Hammia[edit]

[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)

No evidence of wp:notability under eiother GNG or n:sports. Sources are just database listings. Tagged for this since May. North8000 (talk) 12:44, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Algeria. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ - this source offers significant coverage in Arabic, and other coverage can be found here, here, here, and probably a whole lot more in Arabic-language sources. He has made hundreds of appearances in top-level football in Algeria, clearly a notable figure in Algerian football. Resounding keep. Paul Vaurie (talk) 17:26, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If so, then why don't you put those sources into the article? North8000 (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Putting the sources in the article is completely irrelevant and I have no obligation to waste my time for an article you nominated for deletion. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:12, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I provided the sources to demonstrate the subject's notability, here, in the AfD discussion. I have shown you the sources that make the subject pass GNG. I don't have to add them to the article. You can do that if you want, but I have no such obligation. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:14, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I still say "If so, then why don't you put those sources into the article?" That what Wikipedia is all about, editors put in sources and build articles from them. North8000 (talk) 00:59, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is also about editors doing a proper WP:BEFORE instead of wasting other editors' time with an AfD about a footballer who made over 300 top-level appearances. Robby.is.on (talk) 07:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking about the main purpose and thing of value being created. Not one of the other 5,000 things in guidelines, essays, suggestions, policies. North8000 (talk) 14:10, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point was that making demands of people who disagree with the deletion of an article one has nominated for deletion is a bit rich when one hasn't performed due diligence before nomination. Paul Vaurie has as much of an obligation of adding the sources they found to the article as you do – that is: none. Robby.is.on (talk) 17:50, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody said anything about obligation except you two. Wikipedia:VOLUNTARY applies to all, including to my suggestions.North8000 (talk) 15:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think most English-speaking people would not read then why don't you put those sources into the article? as a mere suggestion but as accusatory. Robby.is.on (talk) 19:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My last post was basically responding to your post which said that I said that it was an obligation and I basically was saying that I never said that. My post said "suggestion"; you added "mere" in describing my post. It was a suggestion that instead of criticizing the volunteer who reviewed it and claiming that there are sources in Arabic, it would be better to both settle it and help the article by putting the sources that they described in rather than giving me grief. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 20:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that Echorouk Al Yawmi article is about a different Mohamed Amine Hamia ([1]), and I don't believe it would be in-depth coverage if it did actually cover this footballer as it just names the leading goal-scorers through 11 rounds of the 2016-17 season with very little background. I found an interesting article in Al-Ahram ([2]) that is essentially a match report/match preview, but it's not simply routine coverage as it shows an competing club paying attention to Hammia in the 2018-19 CAF Champions League group stage. I suspect there's more to find, but I'll have to dig a bit. Jogurney (talk) 20:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I checked the other three articles you linked and they are also about the other footballer (not the Hammia who has played most of his career with JSS). @GiantSnowman you may want to reconsider your !vote since none of Paul Vaurie's linked sources above cover the subject of this article. Jogurney (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 20:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show (AGFing here) notability. Also I will add the sources in, it's not difficult... Giant Snowman 20:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Jogurney's re-analysis. Giant Snowman 21:05, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per above. Clealry singificant figure in Algerian football, almost 300 appearnces in the flly pro ALgerian leagues... Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You know that making 300 appearances in football matches doesn't provide a presumption of notability (check WP:NSPORTS2022 if you need a refresher), so why are you mentioning it? Jogurney (talk) 20:33, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It doesn't seem we have enough sourcing to demonstrate the player meets GNG. I'd expect there might be something else out there, but until I see it, I'll stick with delete. Ping me if anything else emerges. MarchOfTheGreyhounds 13:39, 8 September 2023 (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.