Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nguyễn Văn Tùng

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. ✗plicit 14:27, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nguyễn Văn Tùng[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)

Nguyễn Văn Tùng

Association football player who does not satisfy association football notability or general notability. This article consists only of a one-sentence lede, so that it cannot speak for itself and does not establish that there has been significant coverage. This is only a directory entry, but Wikipedia is not a directory. A reader should be able to look at an article and see why the subject is notable. This article was moved from article space to draft space once by User:Engr. Smitty, but was created again in article space, so that another draftification would be move-warring. Not enough information for an encyclopedia article even as a stub. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails GNG and NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 07:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: these articles [1], [2], [3] confer notability. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 09:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep if the above Vietnamese sources are considered reliable and independent. JoelleJay (talk) 22:40, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - despite failing NFOOTBALL, seems to pass GNG per sources above. I would also say Zing News contributes to GNG. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:42, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes GNG with the sources shown here and in the article. Alvaldi (talk) 21:34, 7 March 2022 (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.