Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ravil Tagir

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. Initial claims of GNG have not been supported by other editors. I think there is generally a consensus that this person is not notable Fenix down (talk) 08:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ravil Tagir[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)

Contested PROD. Concern was Article fails WP:Footy and WP:FPL. It's rather under WP:TOOSOON. PROD was contested based on WP:GHITS. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Clearly reaches GNG with all the sources in the article. --Coco (talk) 02:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these sources are either player profiles or transfer news, both of which are generally considered WP:ROUTINE. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:03, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is only one player profile, and barely any pure transfer news: Sabah clearly covers extensively the subject of the player as a whole; the fact that the national press agency portrays the player (although not as extensively) is also a clear sign of notability imho. Takvim also refers to the young player as the "League's most valuable player".

And although goal or teamtalk address some potential transfers, they also produce a significant coverage of the player. --Coco (talk) 03:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - this article is even better sourced that the last time it was prodded - not to mention the first time it was prodded. I'm seeing a huge amount of media coverage for this player. There's nothing routine about this player, or the coverage - and this is an example of WP:NOTROUTINE! Nfitz (talk) 03:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some reliable sources of Sabah, Anadolu Agency and Takvim exist (present in the article itself). Enough coverage to keep. ~Styyx ^{Hi! ^-^} 10:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the coverage is WP:ROUTINE and not significant enough to meet GNG. Giant Snowman 11:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are definitely sources that are not "routine", as explained above. See the sports section of what is and is not routine coverage. --Coco (talk) 03:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article about semi-pro footballer who isn't the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. The online Turkish-language coverage is not in-depth and generally consists of routine transfer speculation. Jogurney (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete he is not fully pro yet, there is no actual claim to notability. We should not be creating articles because people are on a path that might lead to notability, we wait until they actually reach notability to create articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: !voters may wish to expand on their analysis of the sources - most arguments so far just assert that they are either WP:ROUTINE or WP:NOTROUTINE without much explanation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GirthSummit _(blether) 10:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete fails WP:FOOTY, and I would think is under the notability threshold.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:54, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 17:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Even though I understand and appreciate the efforts of User:Cocô53 and User:Nfitz, and I thank them, and normally I'd vote to keep Ravil Tagir's article, I must vote for deletion of Ravil Tagir as well as I demand Burak Ince to be nominated for deletion, as per the status quo Turkish leagues in WP:FPL. Although current status is on sole discretion of limited number of editors who are aware of WP:FPL project page (many editors are ignored), my objection in general continues that Süper Lig, TFF First League, TFF Second and TFF Third League are classified as professional leagues, as constituted and governed under Turkish Football Federation. I brought enough level of 1st party evidences (no POV, no Transfermarkt) to display here that these are professional leagues. I invite everybody to contribute this discussion about status of these leagues. Another issue is that the definition of "Fully Professional League" at WP:FPL still does not exist, yet many articles are deleted pursuant to votes relying on this hollow notion. This is absurd and disgraceful for efforts of all editors with good faith! Editors who utilise this criterion to vote to delete must fill under the notion of "Fully Professional League". Again, I vote Tagir to be deleted as per status quo, but I want Turkish leagues to be recognise under "List of fully professional leagues". Dear User:Cocô53 and User:Nfitz, I appeciate your efforts also here but first, there's a clarification needed. Regards. Isik (talk) 12:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on User:Isik - you think that the Turkish level of football is fully-professional, but you are casting a delete vote? Isn't that an example of disrupting Wikipedia to make a point? Looking back at that discussion, even User:Fenix down thinks the second tier is likely fully professional. But why do you talk about professional instead of fully professional? If you are paid €10 a week to play football, you are professional, but clearly you are not fully professional (full-time), because you need another job. The examples you brought forward in that debate were about what the top players on a team make. It doesn't matter what the top player on the team makes. What does the 18th player on the team make? Though there are many examples of leagues where some teams are fully professional, and others aren't (the 5th and 6th levels of English soccer for example). So really the question is what does the 18th player on the lowest-paid team in the league make? Everyone here would be happy to add more leagues to WP:FPL if references can be found that support it. Nfitz (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2020 (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.