Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Oroglio


 * 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 all.  Syn  ergy 00:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Adam Oroglio

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I am nominating a number of footballers who played only in the Canadian Soccer League, which is not fully professional. Some of them also played for Toronto Lynx in the USL Premier Development League, which is an amateur division of USA & Canada, so these appearances are non-notable as well. All of these subjects therefore fail WP:ATHLETE.

I am also nominating the following subjects:
 * Chris Turner (Canadian footballer)
 * Jason De Thomasis
 * Kayin Jeffers
 * Tristan Murray
 * Desi Humphrey
 * Kadian Lecky
 * Anthony Adur
 * Pablo Alvarado (Italian footballer)

--Angelo (talk) 19:42, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 20:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per new research below which says league is fully-pro. GiantSnowman 15:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues Tavix (talk) 05:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article for the Canadian Soccer League (2006–present) says that it IS a fully professional league. Can someone verify this please? Bettia   (rawr!)  09:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * And just to add to the confusion, the disambig page for the Canadian Professional Soccer League states it was actually a semi-pro league. I think we need to establish the status of these two leagues, when they turned fully professional, and when these players played in this league (before or after it turned fully professional). Bettia   (rawr!)  09:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (ec) Its website certainly states that it is professional. What evidence is there that points to it not being fully pro....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * None whatsoever, as far as I can tell. On that basis, and because all of these player appear on the current rosters and have appeared for their team, I'll have to say keep all (and amend the list of pro leagues accordingly). Bettia   (rawr!)  10:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It may be professional but is it fully-professional? Tavix (talk) 18:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This is getting into hair-splitting. In plain English "professional" means "fully professional" not "semi-professional". If it was "semi" then the prefix would be used in describing it. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I see the league defines itself as "professional", however I am not so convinced about it - that is just because Trois-Rivières Attak, a team playing in such league, seems to be Montreal Impact's reserve side (Impact plays in the USL First Division); same for TFC Academy, which is Toronto FC's "academy" team. I'd rather to see some independent source proving the CPL teams provide fulltime contracts to their first team players before to say it is fully professional in the way we mean. --Angelo (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * RSSSF states that it's fully professional. Bettia   (rawr!)  13:59, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per Bettia. NB it's also worth mentioning that the Canadian champions qualify for the CONCACAF Champions League. --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have enough evidence that this league is fully professional for the presumption to be in favour of notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.