Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of current Major League Soccer players

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. T. Canens (talk) 10:40, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of current Major League Soccer players[edit]

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

Consensus has not been established for this sort of article to exist. The article is entirely sourced from [1] and therefore this violates one of Wikipedia's main notability criteria: see WP:NOTMIRROR. There is no prose contained within the article to establish notability for a stand-alone list as per WP:LISTN. Additionally, WP:LISTCRUFT discourages this sort of article; please refer to #3, #4, #6, #8 and #11. Most importantly, when the transfer window opens, this article will require a ridiculous amount of attention to keep it up to date; both in terms of deleting entries and adding new ones. What purpose does this article serve to justify this? Spiderone 10:55, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 11:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 11:07, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per WP:NOTMIRROR and WP:LISTN. If I want to find a list of all players in MLS, I'll go to the MLS website or to Google. This list serves no encyclopedic purpose. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 11:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's not actually sourced entirely from one location. The editors who maintain it do so from multiple sources, but they don't add them as they make the edits to the club's rosters with the reference to the change in the summary and then update the lists, and once again, LISTCRUFT is an essay. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough, maybe it's not all from one source. Nonetheless, is there any potential for the list to pass the criteria required to be a stand-alone list or WP:GNG? Spiderone 20:02, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we don't need a 'current' player list. No evidence of notability and high risk it will go out-of-date/be inaccurate. Giant Snowman 19:08, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per WP:NOTMIRROR. Ajf773 (talk) 19:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unnecessary list, as the information exists on the individual team pages. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. See no reason for Wikipedia not to host a complete list of players within the division, but perhaps modified to be sortable by name, nation, club, etc. UncleTupelo1 (talk) 17:14, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What Wikipedia policy, or essay even, could be given to support the keeping of this article? Spiderone 18:04, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's useful? What's the point in asking or having the debate if it's known already that there isn't a policy that supports it? UncleTupelo1 13:46, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We're having this discussion because the article does not qualify for WP:CSD, and it is highly likely that a PROD would be disputed. Therefore, we are left with AfD. — Jkudlick ⚓ t ⚓ c ⚓ s 12:07, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And the AfD has no policy or guideline to support it, so it's really questionable taking it to AfD when a discussion on the talk page could have helped apply improvements. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:46, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:38, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnecessary, repeating as it does current squad lists on club pages Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 15:15, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per GiantSnowman. KAP03^{Talk • Contributions} 17:35, 7 January 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.