Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Giallombardo


 * 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. Lots of SPA comments duly disregarded per usual practice. T. Canens (talk) 23:55, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Giallombardo

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Player is non-notable soccer player with no professional experience, and no relevant collegiate history. Fails WP:GNG, WP:ATH and WP:FOOTY/N JonBroxton (talk) 07:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Keep -Andrew is promising player who has already established a quite successful career —Preceding unsigned comment added by Etochihara (talk • contribs) 20:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Actually, it could have even been speedied. — Luxic (talk) 14:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 23:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG; was not eligible for a speedy as some degree of notability is implied. GiantSnowman 23:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Comparable players have profiles, see Nikolas Besagno, Jason Cascio, teammate Oscar Moens among many others. Obviously this is a contextual point. But on another consideration all the PDL teams have pages with rosters full of red-links. Pursuant to WP:IAR we need make this better. Nothing is more frustrating to wikipedia's users than to see articles on a topic riddled with red -- if we are covering the PDL on Wikipedia, and it seems we are, the key players should have profiles. Also, Andrew played for Southampton FC which, at the time, was Championship Division in England. He is quite young, but is in the early stages of a very promising career. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MKS1923 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, Besagno has played for Real Salt Lake of the MLS and Moens has played professionally in the Dutch Eredivisie; they're not exactly comparable to Giallombardo. While that other guy, Cascio, seems to fail WP:FOOTY/N too. Anyway, red links should be use only to indicate [...] that an article should be created for the topic because it would be notable and verifiable. So, if you don't want to have rosters full of red links, simply delink the currently non-notable players (see A.C. Milan Primavera to see what I mean). — Luxic (talk) 21:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually (and this is completely unrelated to this AfD), but I'm begging you please DON'T delete the redlinks on the PDL squads. This is because the redlinks are used not just for article creation, but also for career-tracking when the players turn professional. There is currenly no way using other sources to follow a player's PDL career - the USL website doesn't do it, and there is no other information source which keep track of all the PDL teams a player has played for prior to turning pro. When he turns pro his article is usually created via his pro team's roster; by keeping the redlinks, we can use the "What links here" toolbox to track back and see which PDL team(s) the player has played for, and be able to put together a proper career history. It's a vital way of keeping track of this info, and why the redlinks exist in these instances. (Oh, and BTW, Jason Cascio passes WP:ATH having played for the Seattle Sounders in the USL First Division, while Giallombardo never played a senior game for Southampton) --JonBroxton (talk) 00:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There is an argument, I think, that our Athlete notability guidelines are not in line with current Wikipedia practice. PDL is the highest "amateur" level of soccer in the US and many of its athletes have profiles. Since all its teams have redlinked rosters it might improve the user experience to adapt to expectations. Maybe WP:FOOTY/N should be a little less restrictive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.151.208.130 (talk) 19:14, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Except that soccer is not an amateur sport. The "highest amateur level" guideline of of WP:ATHLETE only applies where there is no professionalism in the sport, which is clearly not the case here. The guidelines at FOOTY/N are perfect, as they allow for the creation of thousands and thousands of articles on professional soccer players. Adapting them to also allow for the creation of thousands and thousands of articles on amateur soccer players would open the floodgates for anyone to create an article on anyone, which would make the WP:FOOTY project entirely unmanagable. If Giallombardo is good enough, he will turn professional at some point anyway, and will be eligible for an article then. --JonBroxton (talk) 19:53, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The following was added to the talk page of this AfD by an IP, I move it here for completeness.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC): Keep - Though it may not seem newsworthy to some, being able to track PDL players is extremely beneficial to those of us that keep track of the United States National Teams from the youth level moving forward.  There is no harm from a player of Giallombardo's caliber (Southampton, US National Team U17 Captain) having a wikipedia page, as I believe the original guidelines were probably meant to keep out "frivilous" players.  Though he may not be Landon Donovan, his name is recognizable within American soccer circles.


 * Delete - never played professionally. Personally I think the last thing we need to do is to make our notability guidelines for sportspeople less restrictive, a lot of editors think they're already far far too lax as it is...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:ATH and WP:FOOTY/N since he has no professional experience. Whether he is promising is irrelevant to the question. The last thing we need is to relax the guidelines - there are already far too many articles on footballers. While some may regard Giallombardo as a high caliber player, the Wikipedia standard is whether he has played a professional game: if he has, he is deemed good enough to be included; if he has not, he is not good enough YET and he should not have a page to himself YET. While some may want to track Giallombardo's career, Wikipedia is not the medium for it. Craddocktm (talk) 11:34, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - per WP:GNG. The subject received "significant coverage" from two reliable sourced international newswires that are "independent" of soccer associations or websites. Additionally, there are enough secondary sources to indicate no original research is needed as per WP:GNG to "extract the content". The coverage as WP:GNG is significant because he was mentioned by name in the articles' titles and filled the reports. moreno oso (talk) 12:50, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And what makes this different from the thousands of other amateur players who recieve significant coverage? We can't include everyone. --JonBroxton (talk) 16:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know about WP:OTHERSTUFF. This one meets WP:GNG. moreno oso (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, WP:GNG also says that significant coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not appropriate for a stand-alone article. — Luxic (talk) 07:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - It meets WP:GNG and seems that the argument for deletion is premised on some default of deleting any American soccer player not in MLS. That is a false standard. Even if we don't elect to write articles for all "the thousands of other amateur players" as Moreno Oso pointed out, that is WP:OTHERSTUFF and the absence of articles for every amateur player does not mean this one should likewise be deleted. It looks fairly substantial at this point. The presumption is established, and personally I have to disagree with a strict deletionist perspective here. We can't include everyone, but we can include an unlimited number of notable persons. Treko (talk) 14:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't see how you can call WP:ATH and WP:FOOTY/N "false standard", when these guidelines are generally accepted by the Wikipedia community. If they are false standard, one may similarly call WP:GNG "false standard". At any rate, if one frames the argument as "since there is no articles on other amateur players, so we should not have an article on Giallombardo", that would necessarily be WP:OTHERSTUFF; however, that is to focus on a side argument and ignore the main one, which is: WP:ATH and WP:FOOTY/N establish that only professional players are deemed notable and Giallombardo has not played a professional game. That is NOT WP:OTHERSTUFF.


 * I don't think it would be a balanced argument to ignore WP:GNG or WP:ATH or WP:FOOTY/N since they are all relevant to the argument. To be fair, all the relevant guidelines should be read together. My interpretation of the guidelines is this: if reliable third party sources can be found on a certain subject, there is a presumption that that subject is notable. However, presumptions can be rebutted by certain facts. In footballer articles, the presumption may be rebutted by the failure to have achieved professional status. Whether the rebuttal will be successful depends on the strength of the presumption: the more reliable sources you can cite, the stronger the presumption. The failure to achieve professional status would rebut a weak presumption but not a strong one. In the case of Giallombardo, only 2 reliable sources offer significant coverage. The presumption tends to be weak and is easily rebutted by the failure to achieve professional status.Craddocktm (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * "Keep"---I strongly reccomend this article should be kept as it has value and merit. Andrew is a strong player with a bright future. I have followed his career since his time in residency and I see his potential. This player was signed to a professional with Southampton FC. In addition the Dayton Dutch Lions are thought to be promoted to USL next season. Furthermore, numerous players who were in residency in Bradenton, who play for comparable clubs in other countries and the US, have their own wikipedia pages.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.172.212 (talk) 11:24, 25 June 2010 (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.