Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnold Hunter


 * 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 Snow Keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 19:45, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Arnold Hunter

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unremarkable person. Notability hasn't been demonstrated with sources and no claim of significance in the article. Moreover edit history shows that page seems to be only used for attempts to defame the person, which is a serious BLP issue. Tvx1 23:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep A whole bunch of other UEFA/FIFA referees do have their own article, even though only as a stub, e.g. Jakob Kehlet, Carlos del Cerro Grande,Yuriy Mozharovsky, Marius Avram, Tsvetan Krastev, Vadims Direktorenko, Radek Příhoda, Denis Scherbakov, and so on, and so on... Or all should be kept, or all should be deleted. Karma-AH (talk) 14:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF and WP:ALLORNOTHING make it that your arguments don't make a valid rationale to keep the article. In fact, you state "keep all or delete all" in your reasoning which means it is not simply a keep !vote. If you want to add those other articles to the nomination, be my guest. Having checked them, I cannot find any evidence that justifies them having a dedicated article. Tvx1 16:19, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * In case you hadn't noticed, I'm in favor of keeping this kind of articles. Besides, Arnold Hunter is not an unremarkable person. His appointment was even discussed before the Olympiacos vs Anderlecht game took place. Karma-AH (talk) 21:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There is no discussion whatsoever. This is just a list of referees appointed for all the matches. Such list are published ahead of every single match in the entire world. That doesn't many that every referee merits a wikipedia article. Tvx1 23:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep—reliable independent sources online, just looking up "Arnold Hunter" reveals a lot of sources. By the way, we shouldn't be basing deletion off of what people use the page for, see WP:LIKELYVIOLATION. Appable (talk) 18:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * All from one country dealing with just one match he led. While you think that is enough, according to our notability guidelines it isn't. Tvx1 19:26, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you cite the relevant notability guideline for referees? I actually couldn't find that, so I'm going off WP:GNG because there are multiple independent reliable sources (sources from the same country are almost always considered independent). Appable (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As per request, a Northern Irish source, Irish source and a French source, respectively.   Karma-AH (talk) 21:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, all just about one of many matches he officiated during his career. See WP:1E. Just how important is this match even in the history of the sport? What's more is that his "errors" didn't even have an impact on the outcome of the game since Anderlecht won and qualified for the next round despite decisions. Tvx1 23:16, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There's also some coverage here and here far before the event, so he's been discussed for other events besides this. And it's not particularly relevant that it didn't have an impact on the outcome - there's still significant coverage, regardless of whether it's "justified" in your view. On an unrelated, I recommend you strike out the third sentence in your nomination since it's fairly clear that that has no bearing in a deletion discussion. Appable (talk) 03:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Giving two links to the exact same source doesn't create multiple sources. And the Irish FA doesn't quite constitute independent coverage. Tvx1 15:53, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep – comments in this discussion have shown multiple independent sources covering this individual's work. WP:1E "Subjects notable only for one event" does surely not apply since he has been a FIFA referee for a five-year period. Participants in international football matches are regularly kept at AfD discussions, and the referee is on the field with the 22+ players (including playing substitutes). Vandalism does not preclude notability. The nominator challenging every !vote they disagree with is rather poor form, as well. C679 01:05, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – per above comments, especially Cloudz679's argument. Article should be improved though. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 01:41, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – Is refereeing at the highest level, BLP1E not relevant here as the sources above are discussing one event that indicates notability not the only event. Fenix down (talk) 15:54, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - it would be helpful if there were some articles showing that he has received significant coverage sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Are there any feature articles in reliable sources that deal with him as a person? Hack (talk) 08:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to add on that there's another source (that I don't think was mentioned yet in this AfD) about the first Europa League match that he refereed, which I think is significant (I know nothing about sports, but the article makes it sound notable). Here's a link. Appable (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Let me google that for you - the first two results, one of which is mentioned above are coverage of him in general, the first few pages show quite few international media outlets reporting specifically about this referee, not just about recent performances but also in general about his appointments to games at the highest level of club football. Fenix down (talk) 08:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what results you're seeing, but I see a profile by his employer (not an independent source) and a blog (not a reliable source). Hack (talk) 08:56, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, so, the Irish FA source is absolutely fine given the wealth of top level third party sourcing available in addition, so no issue there, it is perfectly useable to derive encyclopedic content. Secondly, you can't just say blog = unreliable, you need to provide evidence to support your claim, please. Fenix down (talk) 09:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, no. WP:SPS states that blogs are largely unacceptable. Regardless, 99% of the sources that have been brought up here are simply match-ups listing all the officials. That isn't much proof of significance. That's information that needs to be announced because the teams themselves need to know that. No sources have so far been provide that actually discuss his performances outside of that one Europa League match last thursday, which is currently given undue weight in the article. Tvx1 17:48, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you see the source I listed above by the Impartial Reporter? Appable (talk) 19:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * By the way, my opinion is that the incident itself is clearly notable - there's been a lot of commentary in the media about that. So I think it'd be worth a standalone article somewhere. The question is - what's notable? Is it the event, or the person? In this case, I think Arnold Hunter is the subject made notable by the event, the majority of people and media looking or reporting for this event will know it as the bad calls by Arnold Hunter (rather than the Europa League incident), and that it's worth having an article about him because he was made notable by this particular event. That being said, I think there's still verifiable and possibly notable information about the person beyond this particular incident; seeing the sources that some people have mentioned proves at least some level of significance beyond that event. I feel like we're seeing a lot of consensus that this person is notable enough for inclusion, though obviously nom disagrees still. Appable (talk) 21:21, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - per sourcing above; article needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 18:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep International referee, and passes WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – After looking closely at the article and the comments above, it is my opinion that this international referee passes WP:GNG. Qed237&#160;(talk) 21:36, 3 March 2016 (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.