Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saša Blagojević

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 (non-admin closure). Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:11, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Saša Blagojević[edit]

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

Article's subject fails to meet WP:GNG. A search on GoogleNews produces no hits, a regular Google search shows pages of statistics but no substantive coverage. I have verified that there are no articles on him in either the Serbian or Serbo-Croatian Wikipedias. While he may appear to meet WP:NSPORT, he does not meet the the more-fundamental requirements of WP:GNG. KDS4444^Talk 09:06, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep - Sources indicate that the individual has played in a fully professional league and so passes WP:NFOOTY. Article needs expanding not deleting. Per current consensus, players who have played in a fully professional league are assumed notable. Presence or lack thereof on Serbian WP or any other Wiki is not relevant. Fenix down (talk) 11:43, 30 June 2014 (UTC) Actually not sure he has played FPL. Fenix down (talk) 11:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - numerous appearances in a fully-professional league, as confirmed by reliable sources, so this player meets WP:NFOOTBALL. Needs improving, not deleting, to bring in line with WP:GNG. Nomination smacks of WP:POINT. Giant Snowman 17:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article meets WP:NFOOTY. Very likely a player in a foreign language league is not going to have English sources. I trust you took the effort to search for sources in the languages of the player in question? Secondly whether or not another language wiki has an article isn't a metric we use for deletion, there are many very notable subjects that the smaller language wikis don't have articles for, so if we used that metric we would be deleting alot of very notable subjects. -DJSasso (talk) 18:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It was my understanding that the policies outlined in WP:NFOOTY and WP:NFOOTBALL, both under the heading of WP:NSPORTS, were only intended as useful guidelines, rules of thumb, and that WP:GNG still had to be met to justify a full article. This article is over two years old now with no meaningful citations, and I was able to find no evidence of this individual showing promise of becoming notable in the future. As a permanent WP:SUBSTUB, then, it appeared to fall in the category of deletable articles. Please clarify for me. Thanks. KDS4444^Talk 22:06, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no time limit on when an article has to get the citations, yes the article does obviously need to get them. But some articles will have a hard time easily getting them. In other words people might have to read foreign language articles or they might have to go to newspaper archives to find the sources. NSPORTS etc is intended to be written in a way that as close to 100% of articles that meet it probably meet GNG. In doing so its intended to give those articles a reprieve from deletion until someone has actually put the effort in to show that there are no actual sources. For a player from a foreign language country that would likely mean checking foreign language sources as part of your WP:BEFORE work. -DJSasso (talk) 15:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that there is no time limit, but I also understand that after a "reasonable period of time", if no citations can be found, justification for retaining the article may no longer exist. Two years seemed reasonable to me, I am surprised that this does not seem long enough to you. Second, I understand that the absence of the subject from its own language Wiki is not meant to be a metric of the person's significance, but it would have been good evidence for retaining the article if something-- anything-- had existed there (which it did not). Third, a deletion nomination after two years does not strike me as a "rush" to delete, Trackinfo-- it is a very patient move to have waited this long in the first place, please do not misconstrue the gesture as something it clearly is not. Fourth, I consider verifying the absence of the subject from its own language Wiki and verifying that there are no non-trivial English language resources about the subject at all to add up to a pretty thorough WP:BEFORE— if I began searching the Serbian Internet for evidence of notability, I would not have any good sense of what I was finding (and would likely end up coming across a lot of references that would fail reliability or independence without realizing it). If anyone can provide evidence of such citations, then it would be helpful having those added to the article-- after two years-- rather than vaguely claiming that they "must exist somewhere" but not being able to indicate where they actually are. Instead of that happening, it appears that this article will now remain part of the English Wikipedia, with its unhelpful citations and no indication that it will develop any and no willingness or ability by the article's original creator nor anyone since to make it meet the requirements of the WP:GNG, which means it hangs around as fluff until someone else, probably years from now (won't be me), gets around to nominating it for deletion again. KDS4444^Talk 17:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand your overpowering NEED to delete this guy's article. I'm only involved because this came up as an example of something that was right to get rid of because NSPORT was not adequate. Why they had to choose an obscure soccer player from Serbia to state their case of the classic example, I don't know. I don't know the sport of soccer well enough to put this in perspective. How do defensive players make headlines? Google shows me; he's an active player and has been for quite some time. He's obviously "somebody" in the middle of his career. He was good enough somebody paid a 200,000 Euro transfer fee for him.[1] even though his current team is apparently broke enough to have him pictured in uniform with the wrong name on his back, after the team lost another player for non-payment of their salary.[2] Even if he was a benchwarmer on a professional team there would be press on him. Are you 100% sure you can see everything the Serbian press has written? Is the country's press corps that internet savvy? He meant something to his 2006 team, or his couch wouldn't have itemized him as an excuse when he missed a game under suspension.[3] And if he was suspended in 2006, was there a story on that? I'd think there would be, so the absence of that in google results shows we AREN'T seeing everything in the Serbian press. He's played in almost a hundred professional games, I find him in the agate in one?[4] Maybe I don't know the functions of those soccer websites in foreign languages, but you't think other games from the team would show up more readily suggesting the coverage we can find is itself limited. Can you claim to be an expert in Serbian soccer? If you can't, then you can't assume to know enough to make any categorical statements about this or any other similarly credentialed individual. Our purpose here is to get rid of non-notable individuals. He may be low on the totem pole but he's still mentioned for his soccer playing in about a hundred different places that I can find. Its a lousy article written with too little information. It needs help probably from a Serbian soccer expert. Its not fluff, its not fraud. It doesn't NEED to be removed. Trackinfo (talk) 22:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Appears to meet WP:NFOOTBALL. Mice never shop (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And that does not matter at this point. KDS4444^Talk 17:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This article was brought up at WP:Notability_(sports)#RfC:_Should_we_consider_a_rewording_of_the_intro_paragraph_of_WP:NSPORTS. My point there is both the commonality of his name and the deluge of social media about his name and wikipedia mirrors makes a simple google search difficult. But stuff is there. I added a source that he played internationally. Someone who understands the sport might be able to pick more stuff out of the hundreds of hits on Google. What does Serbian wikipedia say about this guy? It says noting, I already indicated this above, did you read what I wrote? KDS4444^Talk 17:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC) Certainly visible is a playing record showing he played as recently as May 28 of this year, which would be . . . do other leagues shut down during the World Cup? . . . as recently as is possible? I don't understand the rush to delete. Someone please explain. Trackinfo (talk) 20:48, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Blagojević has played in the fully-pro SuperLiga, and it appears that the article can satisfy the GNG even though Blagojević is a very common name which makes it difficult to sort through the Serbian-language sources to find significant coverage. I've expanded the article slightly, but based on my initial review of the Google results at site:rs, I think it will be easy enough to satisfy the GNG. Jogurney (talk) 06:17, 4 July 2014 (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.