Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Sittauer


 * 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   Mixed. Looks like bundling didn't work out here, so I'm closing no consensus with leave to renominate individually, save for Katie Hultin, for whom I believe there's a rough consensus to keep. j⚛e deckertalk 17:06, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Annie Sittauer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a female footballer who hasn't played in a fully pro league nor has received any significant coverage. So therefore she fails both WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:GNG. – Michael (talk) 05:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. – Michael (talk) 05:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. – Michael (talk) 05:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. – Michael (talk) 05:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 07:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete All bar Katie Hultin - none of these others pass WP:GNG and none pass WP:NFOOTBALL. A couple of these may possibly play for the national team in the future, but that is a WP:CRYSTAL argument and not a reason for keeping. Lukeno94 (talk) 14:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all - all fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL; can be created when/if they meet either. GiantSnowman 15:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * At the time of article creation, these women were in the highest tier of women's soccer in the United States. With the new professional league (National Women's Soccer League) starting in a few months, I think you will find some of them in the new league. As an example, see talk page for Julia Roberts (American soccer) for previous delete attempt and subsequent reconsideration.  Women's soccer does not get the same exposure in the media that men do and often times male wikipedia contributors seem to jump at the chance to delete articles about women players when I'm sure there are plenty of other spammy articles ready for deletion. Why is this? Hmlarson (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This is highly offensive. If you look at my contributions alone, you will see numerous contributions to male footballer AfDs... Also, your argument here fails WP:CRYSTAL. Lukeno94 (talk) 10:21, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Hultin, Elston, Roberts Also, Katie Hultin played in Women's Professional Soccer. The article needs fleshing out, yes, but deletion? Seems she clearly passes WP:NFOOTBALL. Of the list, Katie Hultin, Lindsay Elston, and Julia Roberts (American soccer) pass WP:GNG, especially considering the context of low media coverage for women's soccer players. Hmlarson (talk) 23:31, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you clarify where the previous discussion is for Julia Roberts (American soccer) that you alluded to? C 679 23:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * bottom of Talk:Julia Roberts (American soccer). See also User talk:Hmlarson/Archive/1Hmlarson (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Doesn't look like a deletion attempt, just a reviewer's comments when they accepted the article at AfC. The other link is useful for consideration here, thanks for that. C 679 00:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I looked through all of these articles and none of them appeared to meet GNG or NFOOTBALL as they stood - normally, I would search for more sources, but these are all very short, stubby articles with tonnes of information missing, and no real claims of importance made, a lot of them sharing similar flaws. Lukeno94 (talk) 10:21, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Hultin who played in a "fully professional league". The nominator of this job lot obviously doesn't bother with WP:BEFORE. Delete/userfy the others until they play in the new NWSL. 176.253.26.24 (talk) 20:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I've altered my vote, must've been asleep when I went through these, as Hultin has played a pro game. As to the these others that supposedly pass GNG, all I see is a bunch of routine stuff, reports from the teams they've played for themselves, or local sources. In fact, I'm stunned that Julia Roberts was accepted in the AfC, because the comment left by the guy who accepted it is a blatant violation of WP:CRYSTAL! There is actually very little evidence that Hultin did play a pro game, especially as the article creator did not bother to actually show that she did, either in prose, or in the infobox, or even with sources - so unless someone finds a source that says she did, I'll revert my vote to Delete All again, because I couldn't find a source anywhere. Lukeno94 (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Userfy Roberts - She gets a bit more publicity than the typical soccer prospect, but part of it is due to her non-unique name. She wasn't selected in the NWSL draft, which might be a little surprising but also shows she's not a sure-fire NWSL player. My hunch is that she makes it eventually, but that only merits a userfy, not keeping her at the moment. Bdure (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  ·Add§hore·  T alk T o M e ! 13:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 11:03, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep: Passes football notability as a fully professional league and the top of its kind in the country. That's the WPS.  The games were televised.  (I know.  I watched a fair bit.) They were reported on air by ESPN.  Beyond that, Annie Sittauer recieved coverage as a high school player and a university player.  Most of the women who make it to this level will have similar media coverage aiding in notability. --LauraHale (talk) 20:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Close as no consensus – it appears these articles should be considered separately if any of them are going to be deleted. I certainly can not vote delete all or keep all based on the discussion above. C 679 11:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Cloudz679, closing this as no consensus and allow to renominate separately if wanted, sounds like the best option. Mentoz86 (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2013 (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.