Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Paulsen


 * 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. Fenix down (talk) 22:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Alex Paulsen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Paulsen has not played in a professional league, or represented his nation at either Olympics or Senior level. He's not an Olympic athlete if he does not compete at the Olympics. No guarantees he will be first choice goalkeeper for New Zealand. Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 17:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 *  Keep or redirect - Keep, or redirect to Wellington Phoenix FC Reserves. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 17:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep nominator has not complied with WP:BEFORE, there is coverage out there. At most drafify. GiantSnowman 17:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * There absolutely is not coverage enough for this player. If there is, by all means provide some links which display Paulsen's notability. I have not found one article that is specifically about this player. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 17:38, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete I looked for sources but could only find brief mentions at best so as far as I can see he fails WP:GNG due to lack of WP:SIGCOV. Note that the Wikipedia community consensus, seen in WP:ATHLETE, is pretty clear that passing any of the sports-specific notability guidelines is not an automatic notability pass, all subjects must pass WP:GNG regardless of whether they pass WP:OLYMPICS or WP:NFOOTBALL. So even if he appears in the Olympics, his article should still be deleted if no significant coverage on him is found. If someone manages to find enough coverage for him to pass GNG, I'm more than happy to change my !vote. Alvaldi (talk) 18:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I shall note that you are questioning WP:OLY with your statement and suggest this is the wrong place to have this discussion. If that’s your view, feel free to start an RfC for that.  Schwede 66  08:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not questioning WP:OLY, I am mearly stating what the guideline actually says. WP:OLY is a subsection of Notability (sports) (also references as WP:ATHLETE or WP:NSPORT). The FAQ at the top of Wikipedia:Notability (sports) makes it very clear that 1. it does not supersede GNG and 2. Passing a sports-specific notability guidelines, such as WP:OLY, is not an automatic notability pass and all subjects must pass GNG. Editors cannot form a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS and decide that some generally accepted policy or guideline does not apply to articles within its scope. Alvaldi (talk) 09:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep this article was taken to AfD a mere 10 hours after it was created. That's too quick. Moreover, Paulsen is slated to appear in the Olympics, which begin in just a few days. There's no reason to have this discussion yet. L EPRICAVARK ( talk ) 18:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Sorry, what? How is a nomination for deletion "too quick"? The creation of the article was "too quick"! New Zealand have full international Michael Woud in the squad, it is most likely that he will be their first choice. This statement is very WP:CRYSTALBALL. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 18:55, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Meh. It's just as 'crystal-ballish' for you to assume that Paulsen will not appear in the Olympics. There is genuinely no reason why this AfD couldn't have waited until after the Olympics. L EPRICAVARK ( talk ) 19:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Or, even better, the article shouldn't have been created in the first place. I've seen numerous AfDs for players who could go on to play in an international game, or in a pro league, and some of these players even have appearances in professional leagues. If they fail GNG, then the pages are deleted. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 19:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * We're clearly at loggerheads. I've said my piece and I'm happy to leave it to the discretion of the closing admin. L EPRICAVARK ( talk ) 19:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep As per LEPRICAVARK. Nexus000 (talk) 04:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Even by the delete !voters' interpretation of NSPORT, namely that it is to stop articles from being quickly deleted rather than to keep them forever, it was still inappropriate to nominate this 10 hours after creation. Smartyllama (talk) 14:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how it is possible to interpret it any other way as the FAQ on NSPORT is very clear on this and even sources the community consensus behind it. If the deletion nominator did a WP:BEFORE and found no sources then the nomination is not inappropriate. Below are the core matters of this case.
 * 1. All athletes must have the significant coverage to pass WP:GNG, regardless of whether the pass sports-specific notability guidelines such as WP:NOLYMPICS (which he does not pass), per Wikipedia community consensus as stated and sourced in the FAQ at the top of WP:NSPORT. Any WP:LOCALCONCENSUS by a limited group of editors cannot decide that this does not apply to articles within its scope.
 * 2. The subject has not been shown to have any kind of significant coverage which he needs to pass GNG, neither in the article nor in this AfD.
 * 3. Claims that he might gain coverage by participating in the Olympics goes against Wikipedia not being a WP:CRYSTALBALL.
 * 4. Of the keep !votes, they 1. state that there is coverage out there but do not produce any to back that up 2. state the fallacious believe that the subject will gain some kind of automatic notability if he appears in the Olympics, which as shown above, is not in accordance of Wikipedia policies or guidelines. 3. State that the nomination was inappropriate due to it comming 10 hours after creation, which does not go against any of Wikipedia policies or guidelines, and does not explain why now three days later noone has been able to produce any evidence that suggest the subject passes GNG.
 * Alvaldi (talk) 16:15, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep subject is 19 years actively playing and part of the Olympic team see little point deleting it now.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:54, 24 July 2021 (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.