Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miloš Dragojević

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. Wikiprojects do not get to make their own guidelines independant of community norms so in any case of dispute about exactly where the inclusion bar falls the closer should rely on the community consensus which is found at Wikipedia:ATHLETE#Association_football which states inter alia Players who have appeared, and managers who have managed, in a fully-professional league (as detailed here), will generally be regarded as notable. There is no dispute that the individuals do not have independant sources and are not meeting the community guideline so the close is obvious. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Miloš Dragojević[edit]

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

Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also nominating the following articles for deletion for similar reasons. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all except Nuhodžić

According to WP:FOOTYN players are demed notable if:

"They have played for a fully professional club at a national level of the league structure. This must be supported by evidence from a reliable source on a club by club basis for teams playing in leagues that are not recognised as being fully professional."

Secondly, according to the WSC article (which we used to reference the claim that the Montenegrin First League is not fully professional at WP:FPL):

"According to official data, 98 per cent of the 5,304 registered players are amateurs, but almost all are paid, many being partly funded by agents, who make big profits by selling them on abroad. But there is only one big club in the new domestic league, Budućnost Podgorica, who were regular members of the old Yugoslav first division. Their annual budget is claimed to be around €300,000. The only other full-time professional clubs are Zeta Golubovci and Sutjeska Niksic."

Thirdly, all four of these players are under contract with Budućnost Podgorica as evidenced by their website. According to UEFA.com and the club's website Dragojević appeared in 4 Europa League matches and 10 league matches for the club in the current season. Đikanović appeared in 11 MFL matches this year and 4 Europa League fixtures. Cicmil didn't appear in a single league or European match this season, but has appeared for the club in 3 league matches earlier. I can't find any data on Nuhodžić's appearances (he certainly doesn't seem to have appeared in any competition for the club this season and I can't find any data on earlier seasons), while Mugoša played in 5 league matches and spent six minutes on the pitch in one Europa League game this season. Therefore only Nuhodžić deserves to be deleted as the other four players pass the notability criteria set by WP:FOOTY. Timbouctou 23:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, this goes for Nikač too as he appeared in 8 league matches this season. Timbouctou 23:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - playing for a professional club is not enough, WP:ATHLETE states that players are notable if they have played in a fully-professional league - which, as evidenced above, is not the case. Giant Snowman 01:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the tag on WP:FOOTYN (contents of which I cited above) says that "it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more WikiProjects on how notability may be interpreted within their area of interest. It has not been accepted as a Wikipedia policy or guideline, though it may be consulted for assistance during an AfD discussion or when considering creating a standalone article." Interestingly, it also says that "the player section of this notability guidance is currently being discussed and edited at WP:Notability (sports)"

If whatever WP:FOOTY's current criteria says isn't worth crap than why do we have that page there at all? Also, how can you delete articles based on criteria that are currently being discussed? Is this what passes for "good faith" nowadays? Timbouctou 07:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOOTYN is merely an essay that some members of the Football WikiProject wrote; WP:NFOOTY has been reached through discussion and consensus. Giant Snowman 20:45, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't answer my questions and it seems you never bothered to actually read what the tag on top of WP:FOOTYN says. What is the purpose of having an essay on notability presumably endorsed by WP:FOOTY if whatever it says can be ignored in WP:FOOTY AfDs? How come some members of the project are so diligent in their efforts to delete articles, but are astonishingly passive about conflicting notability guidelines currently in existence, as evidenced by this AfD (Dragojević and Đikanović satisfy 2 out of 4 criteria listed by the essay, but none of the ones at WP:NFOOTY)? How come the nominator is so keen to delete articles using a criteria that is currently being discussed at WP:ATHLETE? And btw, what exactly makes a league "fully professional" by Wikipedia standards is beyond me. For instance, the pdf cited as "source" at WP:FPL for classifying the Premier League of Bosnia and Herzegovina as not fully professional says that "Klubovima Premijer lige BiH, Prve lige NS/FS BiH i Prve lige FS RS mogu se ustupati igrači koji imaju profesionalni ugovor, kao i igrači amateri. (Eng: "First and second level clubs are allowed to use both professional and amateur players.") The 2006 WSC article cited for Montenegro says that "98 per cent of the 5,304 registered players are amateurs, but almost all are paid, many being partly funded by agents". So they are paid amateurs then? The Finnish Veikkausliiga has 93 percent of professionals in it, yet WP:FOOTY sees it as not fully professional citing a 2005 article which claims that "most players are part-timers" (which is factually incorrect because the same 2010 report says that back in 2005 64 percent of all players were pros). On the other hand, the Scottish Premier League sometimes features part-time players and even clubs and yet nobody bothered to list it as "not fully professional". Is it me or is there a theme emerging here? The problem with this is that the criteria at WP:NFOOTY works great for leagues where there's a clear distinction between all-professional and all-amateur leagues, but is obviously insufficient for smaller leagues which often use a mix of both. Not only is this unfair to begin with, it becomes downright insulting when - having absolutely no clue what's the proportion of professionals and amateurs in these semi-pro leagues - members of WP:FOOTY are so quick to label a country's top division as non-notable or at least less notable than England's FOURTH division. So we get a situation in which Anorthosis Famagusta FC is good enough to play in the group stage of the top continental competition, but a player who spent his career there is less notable than somebody who plies his trade at Oxford United F.C.. And how come certain WP:FOOTY editors are so keen to delete allegedly non-notable players claming that they blindly follow policies - while at the same time they are not nearly as keen to resolve blatantly obvious issues with the said policies? In Montenegro's case, most players are de facto professionals but are not legally registered as such to avoid having to pay percentages of transfer fees to their clubs. The Montenegrin Professional Players' Union was founded about a year ago specifically to tackle this problem and reduce the influence of players' agents on the game there. And even if we take the data from WSC's 2006 article as relevant, two percent of 5,304 players means that there are 106 fully licensed professionals in the country, which is nearly half of all the players appearing in the 12-team top division (and one can safely assume that the number of professionals has increased since the article's publication four years ago). I don't particularly follow Montenegrin football and I don't think the world would come to an end if these six players get deleted from Wikipedia, but that's exactly the reason why I'm so astonished by editors who seem to have ran out of better things to do around here and are deleting stuff wholesale while being oblivious to the questionable quality of the very guidelines they claim they are upholding. Sir Sputnik already tried a wholesale deletion of Finnish players, now it's Montenegrins. I assume Bosnians are there somewhere on his hitlist, even though the top league is classified as non-professional by Wikipedia just because an undetermined number of players at an undetermined number of clubs may or may not be playing top level football without professional contracts. Unless you can provide something more reliable than a four year old magazine article to prove that the Montenegrin First League is not fully professional, I don't see a reason to delete these articles. Timbouctou 00:36, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FOOTYN is an essay, nothing more than personal opinion, and not an established guideline like WP:NFOOTY - therefore it is not revelant to AfD debates. The page itself states that it has "not been accepted as a Wikipedia policy or guideline." I don't know why it claims to be useful for such discussions, as it clearly isn't - I mean, I could write an essay stating "everyone is notable if they wear glasses", but that wouldn't make it real, would it? Also, a source states that the Montenegrin league is not fully-professional; it is up to you to provide another source which states it is - this is called verifiability and is an important Wikipedia policy. Giant Snowman 00:51, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While there is truth just about everything you (Timbouctou) have just said, much of it is of little direct relevance to this afd and should be addressed in more appropriate forums (talk pages for WP:FOOTY, and WP:FPL would be my suggestion). It also does not change the fact that all of these players still fail the paramount criterium for notability: Significant coverage in reliable sources. Unless this criterium is met, I cannot see who the inclusion of these articles can be justified. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all except Dragojević and Đikanović - Games in European competition are considered sufficient if both teams are fully professional. The rest fail all the relevant guidelines. J Mo 101 (talk) 13:22, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Unless sources are generated that explicitly demonstrate that they have actual appearances for the club in top level national club games or international games. Currently those sources are not present, and the information is not reflected in the infoboxes. Sven Manguard _Talk 06:21, 24 November 2010 (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.