Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caoimhin Kelleher

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. (non-admin closure) Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 09:31, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Caoimhin Kelleher[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)

Contested PROD. This subject fails WP:FOOTY's notability guidelines. Being named on the bench for a match, even the Champions League final, is not enough to confer notability. – Pee Jay 16:24, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. – Pee Jay 16:31, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Winning the Champions League has brought him a fair amount of coverage centred around him, particularly in Ireland where he is being counted as one of the 12 Irishmen to win the Champions League but also in Britain's The Times, who are covering his quick dash to the Toulon tournament [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] He may never have played a professional match but let's be honest if he went into the amateur game or stopped playing tomorrow, there would be continuing interest in the case of a player who won the Champions League and then never played a professional match. This is not the same case as sitting on the bench for a league match in November. 89.243.238.65 (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 17:22, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 17:22, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 17:22, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He was on the bench of the Champions League final therefore he got a medal and is considered a winner of this trophy. Seeing as it's the most prestigous trophy in club football, I think that he is notable enough to keep his article in Wiki. — Dudek1337 (talk) 19:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- There's nothing in WP:FOOTY's notability criteria about players who have only ever been on the bench. Besides, the only reason he was on the bench is because UEFA allowed teams to name 12 subs this year, and the only way he would have got on the pitch is if both Alisson and Mignolet were injured or sent off. This is a statistical quirk, nothing more. – Pee Jay 20:36, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I agree the article does not meet WP:NFOOTY, maybe an argument for WP:SPORTSPERSON, but I think it does meet WP:GNG, even if you discount coverage of Toulon from today (the sources IP 89.243 posted above) as all being WP:BLP1E, there are still sources from earlier that I think count as WP:SIGCOV. The WP:THREE are Irish Mirror 2018-11-05, Goal.com 2018-11-14 and Liverpool Echo 2019-03-12. Also I'm finding a ton of routine coverage, quite WP:SUSTAINED for someone so young IMO. Seems to clearly be among the echelon of young superstar players, despite a lack of senior appearance. For example, from 2015, 2016, 2018, 2018 again. Possibly draftify, but I think it's a GNG keep already. – Levivich 23:35, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- That sort of coverage is fairly routine for any young player who makes a move to a big club. I have no doubt that he will someday play a competitive, first-team match for a professional club, at which point he will meet WP:FOOTY's notability guidelines, but if his career were to stop today, would you really consider him notable? – Pee Jay 10:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  I come at this from a complicated place. One thing I strongly disagree with is the notion that a player will "become" notable when they have a senior professional game appearance (and thus meet NFOOTY). That implies automatic notability to any senior professional player with 1 appearance, and that's basically the crusade I'm fighting against. In other words, NFOOTY without GNG = not notable in my book. As far as routine, yes, call-ups, contract signings, changing teams, etc., is all routine and just about every player gets a write-up in the news surrounding those events. But I think the volume and detail for this player goes beyond what is typical. For example, the story about him singing karaoke with his teammates. That's not the kind of news coverage that every player gets–that demonstrates (to me) a higher-than-average level of interest in this player on behalf of the media. Also, there's a lot of speculation surrounding his contract moves, which is common... for a Liverpool superstar, not just for any player on any team (even in a first-tier fully professional league). To your question: if he quit today would I consider him notable? No... I mean, stepping back, no, I wouldn't give him a stand-alone page. My personal criteria for that would be much, much higher–like having played at least one full season before anyone gets a stand-alone page–but I'm also aware that my person criteria is much tighter than the community consensus here. So I !vote keep based on my interpretation of global consensus when it comes to notability for a footballer... it's a keep not by my personal standards so much as it's a keep by community standards. Plus, as a practical matter, he is young and still playing, so if we draftified it, it'd be moved out of draft space as soon as he took the pitch and got one game appearance, which is highly likely to happen imminently. Not that draftifying would be the worst choice here, but for this particular player (who I think is a bona-fide "star' and not just any player), draftifying seems like an unnecessary step. TLDR: he's not far over the notability line, but he's over the line with WP:THREE separate solid sources over a six-month period. – Levivich 17:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep probably passes GNG; article needs substantial overhaul though. Giant Snowman 07:38, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep off a very quick single web search, easily passes WP:GNG, will almost certainly pass WP:NFOOTY soon and if he doesn't is at the point where that will convey additional WP:GNG-type articles. SportingFlyer T·C 06:40, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG, per all above. Ejgreen77 (talk) 20:48, 7 June 2019 (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.