Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vadim Zubavlenko (2nd nomination)

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. Daniel (talk) 21:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vadim Zubavlenko[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)

Article about former footballer (hasn't been with a club since last September) who made a single appearance for a club in the Russian FNL. Although that single appearance creates a presumption of notability under WP:NFOOTBALL, it is invalid because the article comprehensively fails WP:GNG based on a search of online English- and Russian-language sources. The article was previously sent to AfD where it was kept on the (erroneous) view that his career had not ended and he might make further appearances in a fully-pro league. It's obvious now that his professional footballing career is over. Jogurney (talk) 17:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. Passing WP:NFOOTBALL is irrelevant as WP:NSPORT clearly states that it does not supersede GNG and that all athletes must pass GNG, regardless of whether they pass a sports-specific notability guideline.

Q2: If a sports figure meets the criteria specified in a sports-specific notability guideline, does this mean he/she does not have to meet the general notability guideline?
A2: No, the article must still eventually provide sources indicating that the subject meets the general notability guideline. Although the criteria for a given sport should be chosen to be a very reliable predictor of the availability of appropriate secondary coverage from reliable sources, there can be exceptions. For contemporary persons, given a reasonable amount of time to locate appropriate sources, the general notability guideline should be met in order for an article to meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. (For subjects in the past where it is more difficult to locate sources, it may be necessary to evaluate the subject's likely notability based on other persons of the same time period with similar characteristics.)

Alvaldi (talk) 18:01, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:59, 23 July 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 09:47, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - according to Crimean Sport, as of May 2021, he is playing for FC TSK Simferopol in the Crimean Premier League, which might explain why most football database websites show him as not having an active career. With that being said, other than the one interview that I have just linked to, I can't find any other worthwhile coverage so this doesn't look to be a GNG pass. If significant coverage other than that one interview is found, please ping me as I may change my vote. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep passes GNG and has an active career.--Ortizesp (talk) 12:52, 27 July 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.