Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Paterson

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Paterson[edit]

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

Contested PROD, which was removed due to what I hope was a misunderstanding (I'd used the catch-all term "footballer" to describe the subject, meaning "a person who plays one of the various codes of football", but apparently this is "wrong" when referring to someone who plays a code other than association football/soccer). That said, the subject of the article remains stubbornly non-notable per WP:NRU, which is the applicable standard regardless of the categories claiming he's a former rugby league player. The New Zealand team he played for isn't at the appropriate level of competition, and the two Japanese clubs ~~play in the Top League, which is not a fully professional competition~~ did not play at the appropriate level at the time he was signed with them. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:05, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While the two teams he played for in Japan are in Top League now, when he was with Coca-Cola Red Sparks they weren't in the Top League and he appears to have been at both at same time but can't find anything about game time or caps for each one. I can't find anything for him actually so don't think he meets notable WP:NRU. Just to correct you, Top League does meet WP:NRU according to point 2 as its in the lists here Professional Leagues NZ Footballs Conscience^(talk) 03:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Duly noted re that correction. Neither here nor there for the current debate, but the article on Top League indicates that most of the local players are amateurs (with the imports being professional). Not sure whether that's just one of those things or not, but it may be important for the relevant Wikiproject. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 05:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that is another argument of if the league is at a high enough level but doesn't really affect this debate that the page should be removed.NZ Footballs Conscience^(talk) 20:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. And I'll leave that discussion for specialists to have elsewhere. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:00, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom. Fails GNG. Also an apparent COI by article creator. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 04:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What DerbyCounty said. Does not meet GNG notability requirements and does not meet NRU or RLN. Mattlore (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet sportsperson notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:54, 14 July 2017 (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.