Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Dibling

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. clear consensus to keep. Bruxton (talk) 01:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Tyler Dibling

[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)

Currently, this player is not notable. He has not played in a professional football match, and his only appearances to date have been at youth level. Daemonickangaroo2018 (talk) 08:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Daemonickangaroo2018 (talk) 08:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are 11 sources cited. The rationale makes no attempt at discussing why these sources fail to establish notability. Garuda3 (talk) 08:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 January 3. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The topic appears to pass WP:BASIC with the sources currently presented. ––FormalDude (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Overkill on his youth career, he is only 16, however there is enough there to suggest to me that this will be notable in the future. So I suggest to move too draft space. Govvy (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Only 16 and already has a Premier League bench appearance to his name. Only a matter of time before he makes his professional debut, and he will only continue to garner more coverage as his career progresses. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 15:23, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Already notable enough to pass GNG. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 15:23, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per above. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 18:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets GNG due to coverage, particularly The Athletic piece. Giant Snowman 20:10, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: passes GNG, so football crystal ball guidelines are irrelevant. St Anselm (talk) 22:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Following this discussion on WP:Football, it seems that I have misunderstood the criteria &/or am somewhat out of date, so I'm happy to have the discussion closed as Keep. Daemonickangaroo2018 (talk) 12:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - multiple WP:RS giving detailed coverage of Dibling Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:00, 7 January 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.