Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Signe Carstens

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. ✗plicit 11:29, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Signe Carstens[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)

Not inherently notable therefore WP:GNG must be satisfied. I have analysed the sources currently presented in the article as well as those found in DDG, Google News and ProQuest and will present a source analysis below to explain why the sourcing does not satisfy GNG currently. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Women, Football, and Denmark. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Source assessment fails GNG Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
http://www.fortunahjorring.dk/index.php/dk/11-dansk/660-2-x-carstens-pa-u16-landsholdet	This is a club that she used to play for so not independent	Contains no info on her other than the fact that she has played for Denmark U16 and Fortuna U18	✘ No
https://www.fodboldforpiger.dk/2018/11/signe-carstens-vi-har-stadig-ikke-ramt-vores-hoejeste-niveau/		There are two quotes from her but absolutely no independent analysis whatsoever.	✘ No
https://nordsoeposten.dk/tre-unge-fortsaetter-udviklingen-i-fortuna/		~ Mentioned that she signed in Feb 2018, has a twin (Mathilde) and was injured for one year. No other info can be extracted.	~ Partial
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. Agree with Spiderone's assesment of the sources. Also did a search but was unable to find anything of significance. Alvaldi (talk) 10:02, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 12:00, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 17:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've searched in a few places but found nothing of value. Can you please share these sources showing detailed coverage? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:51, 3 May 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.