Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Elliott (footballer)

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 per WP:ATHLETE and WP:BIO. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:54, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Elliott (footballer)[edit]

This article on a footballer was originally PROD'ed on the grounds that the player has never played in a fully professional league and therefore fails WP:ATHLETE. PROD was then removed with the comment "Competitors who have competed in a fully professional league, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis. removed deletion notice as it said i could"........even though the player hasn't played in a fully professional league..... ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:49, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He plays for a club that meets the notability-criteria and thus I think the same criteria should be used for him. Wikipedia should strive for collecting as much knowledge as possible and this article provides enough information for anyone interested in the club's players. I do not see any reason to have only articles on those players who competed in a fully professional league before and ignore all those who never managed this (yet) as it only leads to the situation that when viewing Lewes FC you can only find information on a few players while you could find it on every player if such guidelines as WP:ATHLETE were treated with a bit of common sense and not as the only possible criteria. So#Why 11:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Notability is not inheireted. Just because his club is notable doesn't make him notable. -Djsasso (talk) 19:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:ATHLETE, and probably WP:BIO as well. Hasn't even played a game at Conference National level yet, and even when he does he will be one level short of meeting the above criteria. - fchd (talk) 11:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - notability is not inherited, and he clearly fails WP:ATHLETE - even though his club may pass the notability guidelines, he clearly doesn't. The only way he could possibly pass as notable is if he had a number of third-party reliable sources talking about him, and he doesn't. Wheelchair Epidemic (talk) 12:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 12:47, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as he fails notability at WP:ATHLETE having never played in a fully professional league or competition. --Jimbo^[online] 15:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly fails WP:ATHLETE. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 15:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article on Steve Elliott (footballer) is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Association football related articles on Wikipedia.Steve is a paid footballer so could be classed as professional whilst not wanting to argue ins and outs surely wikipedia needs to evolve and progress all the time .are admin aware supporters managers clubs often try to refer to wikipedia about players to find out what there background is. this could mean more use if wikipedia was to recognise non league football especially the highest divisions.steve has been at an academy of a pro club could also have moved to grimsby a pro club but chose a club looking to progress.careful thought and encourageing non league could be beneficial to all after all he is on lewes fc page as a named player .if wiki is not for him then should the clubs of that level of football be allowed to name players or even have a wiki page.i obviously dont want to see non league clubs have there pages removed quite the opposite in fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.209.61 (talk) 19:50, 20 July 2008 (UTC) — 90.193.209.61 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- His club is notable. He isn't. Wheelchair Epidemic (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Being paid doesn't mean you're a professional footballer. As he is a part-time footballer he is classed as semi-professional, not amateur as people are suggesting. Amateur is pub football. --Jimbo^[online] 12:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete amateur footballer who definitely fails WP:ATHLETE. Not really worthy of an article. --Angelo (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable amateur athlete that plays for notable club. Fails WP:ATHLETE. --Deadly∀ssassin 21:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, being paid is not enough. We have (overly inclusive, even) criteria. Punkmorten (talk) 22:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How, pray tell, are these criteria "overly inclusive"? I will give you 1 example - Joe Lewis, who plays for recently promoted Peterborough United, was called up to Fabio Capello's last England squad - yet he has not made any league appearances in a level higher than League Two! That's "barely notable" by our standards. The notability criteria for athletes has many problems, chief among them inconsistency, but I don't think being "overly inclusive" is one of those problems... ugen64 (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sorry, but no BanRay 22:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:ATHLETE. Giant Snowman 16:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keepthe links in the steve elliott article such as lewes fc and leatherhead fc and others give details of clubs at a lower level than steve plays so presumably they are notable. the player in this case steve is not notable apparently even though he plays a higher level than some of the notable clubs. the divions are recognised by wiki so become notable eg conference south also other divisons are notable yet a player playing higher level is not notable. whatever the outcome it seems a grey area.Red01red (talk) 16:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It isn't a grey area at all. The WP:ATHLETE policy states that a sportsman must have played in a "fully professional league" i.e. one where all players are full-time sportsmen. None of the leagues this player has played in come even close to meeting that requirement -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:01, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - The bit about clubs at his level or lower being notable is also irrelevant, as the policies on clubs and players are completely separate. A club might be notable but that doesn't mean every player that's played for them is. It's the same with bands - Scouting for Girls are clearly a notable band, but their drummer Peter Ellard isn't notable in his own right......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Completely non-notable! Fails WP:Athlete by some margin. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:47, 21 July 2008 (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.