Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene Wilson (English footballer)

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:01, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene Wilson (English footballer)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject appears to be a non-notable football player. There are no references. Article is of poor quality. Jdp407 (talk) 20:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter (parlez) @ 21:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter (articulate) @ 21:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Rcsprinter (shout) @ 21:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Thisa discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:34, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- It is not a good article, but you can hardly expect to find a lot pog Ghits for a player active 1954-62. As I understand it Stockport County were then in one of the lower divisions of the league, whose regular players are regarded as notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:42, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL with over 200 appearances in a fully-professional league, reference added to verify notability. The nominator should be reminded of WP:BEFORE; I also suggest the article is moved to simply Gene Wilson (footballer) as that appears to be the COMMONNAME. Giant Snowman 17:42, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The old Football League Third Division North surely isn't a "fully professional league" is it?! Clavdia chauchat (talk) 19:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Professionalism was first introduced in the English league system in 1885, and it was fully professional post-WW2. Giant Snowman 19:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, do you have a source for that? No offence but it sounds pretty dubious. Off the top of my head Jo Broadhurst's dad and the England women's team's first manager both played in the Football League as semi-pros. I'm sure there are many, many (many) others. Clavdia chauchat (talk) 21:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

League Football and the Men Who Made It by Simon Inglis (1988) - but do you have a reference that those two were semi-pro? I'm more than happy to check my book on Bradford City players tonight for Eric Worthington as it details which players were amateur/semi-pro/professional. Giant Snowman 09:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Schoolteachers I think, and there's other more prominent examples like John Atyeo. Anyway, I agree with Football League players usually being presumed notable (as long as they can be shown to meet GNG – can this one??) but I think an "FPL" should at least be at a national level of the league structure. Is there any other regionalised lower leagues on the list? Clavdia chauchat (talk) 21:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are enough books out there about FL players that one can safely presume notability from a GNG perspective, however the stuff online is a bit poor (it's out there, simply not reliable enough to include I don't think). If your concern is simply that Mr Wilson played in a 'regional' division then don't forget that he played in the Football League Division Three 1958–1962. Giant Snowman 09:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - WP:FPL doesn't include Football League Third Division North at all. Having 200 appearances doesn't automatically make him notable, and I haven't been able to find significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. I might be wrong, but he doesn't seem to satisfy WP:NFOOTBALL at all. Surely one source isn't enough to prove notability, and I hardly think that a single page from a website providing statistics and information on 100's of players counts as 'significant coverage'. Jdp407 (talk) 16:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdp407: - FPL does include the Football League, which the Football League Third Division North was a part of. Giant Snowman 16:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: - As far as I can see, whilst it includes the Football League Championship, the Football League One and the Football League Two, it does not include the Football League, or the Football League Third Division North. Am I correct in assuming these are different things? Jdp407 (talk) 16:39, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the Football League Championship, the Football League One and the Football League Two are the Football League; each one is a division, sitting at levels 2, 3 and 4 respectively in the English football pyramid. The Football League Third Division North was the old third tier of football in England and is therefore equivalent to the modern day Football League One. Giant Snowman 16:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying that! I had looked at WP:FPL not seen it, but didn't realise that it was the equivalent of Football League One. Jdp407 (talk) 16:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (voted above). IN the 1960s and 1970s the Football League had Divisions I-IV. At one stage it was Divisions I & II (which were nationwide) and III N and III S. These were reorganised into divisions III-IV. In a period before TV money created astronomic salaries at the top, these four divisions WERE the professional game. When Divisions I & II became the Periership and the Championship, Divisions III and IV became League I and League II. We really need some clearer guidline in FOOTY as to what articels are permissible. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need to change FOOTY in this regard - I have been here for 7+ years and this is only the 2nd or 3rd time I can recall an editor doubting the notability of somebody who had a career in the Football League; and every time it has been questioned, the answer has always been a resounding "notable." Giant Snowman 18:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, hundreds of appearances in the football league, meets WP:NFOOTBALL comfortably in my view. The lack of Ghits is to be expected given the era in which he played. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:38, 15 September 2013 (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.