Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vitālijs Artjomenko

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. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vitālijs Artjomenko[edit]

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG, and who has not played in a fully pro league. No reason given for contesting. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:57, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 17:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Unfortunately, Wikipedia:FPL doesn't mention Latvia ( and that's where this player has played his professional matches ) in any of the lists, be it "Fully Professional League" or otherwise. Can the nominator provide the proof of the Lativan Higher League being semi-professional ? --Ezhuks (talk) 13:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot. However, the burden of proof is to establish notability, and in the absence of any information the pro status of the Latvian Higher League, we cannot assume it is fully pro. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:29, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 20:34, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think he is notable player. And AEP Paphos is in fully pro league. Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that AEP Paphos is in a fully pro league is moot, because he has not played for them. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable footballer. Fails WP:GNG and doesn't appear to meet WP:NFOOTBALL. Argyle 4 Life^talk 16:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as whether he meets the sport-specific guideline seems to be slightly in doubt, I decided to weigh this article on whether the subject meets the general notability guideline or not. After a search, I couldn't find any English sources that show significant coverage. Therefore, as no-one has provided any references showing that he meets the GNG, I'm going with delete. Jenks24 (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2011 (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.