Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Davis (footballer)


 * 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 no consensus. Clearly fails WP:NFOOTY, but split on WP:GNG. ansh 666 05:23, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Ben Davis (footballer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NFOOTY; has not made an appearance in a fully professional league or for a national team in a full international. Little available to suggest he would pass WP:GNG Eagleash (talk) 01:37, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. WeAreAll Here  talk  02:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore -related deletion discussions. WeAreAll Here  <sub style="color:blue">talk  02:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand -related deletion discussions. <b style="color:red">We</b><b style="color:orange">Are</b><b style="color:blue">All</b> Here  <sub style="color:blue">talk  02:59, 14 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - Maybe case of WP:TOOSOON but at this stage he fails WP:FOOTY  NZFC  (talk) 03:04, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 05:44, 14 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Draftify definitely a WP:TOOSOON but we really don't do a good job with "people who are about to be notable." While he may not be notable yet, he's certainly close to it. SportingFlyer  talk  05:45, 14 April 2018 (UTC) UPDATE: Keep or Draftify I don't have a problem either way - the sourcing here is typically better than most people who don't pass WP:NFOOTY and probably passes WP:GNG, but I'm also happy draftifying. SportingFlyer  talk  04:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 05:47, 14 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - regardless of WP:NFOOTY, there are multiple reliable sources on this footballer, so it passes WP:GNG. With little effort I added two of them, additional reliable sources exist as well.  Kees08  (Talk)   06:16, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete or Userfy Although an interesting situation to be picked for the Singapore national squad, unless he plays for Fulham first team or the national team he still fails NFootball. There just needs a bit more to pass GNG in my opinion. Govvy (talk) 11:11, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Are there a specific number of sources you would need? There were more; I thought I had added enough to pass WP:GNG  Kees08  (Talk)   11:12, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I only just saw your reply, but I refer to WP:ROUTINE, it's always helpful to have citations to specific events with a player, but being picked for the national team isn't enough for me, a citation where he clearly plays football at top level would pass it for me on GNG and NFootball. Govvy (talk) 10:45, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
 * He clearly doesn't pass WP:NFOOTY and I'm nervous that's all you're taking into consideration: the question is whether he passes WP:GNG. I think there's enough non-routine coverage there to do it, across a couple different countries. SportingFlyer  talk  17:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * GNG stipulates significant coverage and this article doesn't quite have that, between six citations that's only three sources. I really don't get why people don't take citations correctly, for instance a 26 year old footballer called Ante Bakmaz has 15 citations nine of them covering the player across multiple countries, they also cover his footballing career into European competition, this is more than enough to pass GNG for significant coverage yet people want to delete it? Govvy (talk) 18:16, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The article may not have it yet, but what's important is the subject does, and I'm confident after a before search he passes WP:GNG (see  (etc). Also, there are at least four sources in the article, and the two that are doubled up are from different points in time, drastically in one case. SportingFlyer  talk  18:29, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep or Draftify - Hello, I thought I'd give it a go and try some nominations. From what I have read I understand he dose not suit the standard of WP:NFOOTY and is subject for a WP:TOOSOON, however I feel in a couple of weeks, or months he will. In terms of WP:GNG he dose also clip with it and is at a mere pass but still in my opinion passes. Thanks. --  ATZNA   22:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)  This account is a sock Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - Reading the sources I feel he passes WP:GNG with no problem. I have put in 2 or 3 sources as well.  ATZNA   04:45, 16 April 2018 (UTC)  This account is a sock Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. The Straits Times and ESPN references satisfy the GNG, IMO. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 14:57, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 17:19, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet our notability guidelines for footballers, which are absurdly low already.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Your vote doesn't take into account whether he passes WP:GNG, though, just WP:NFOOTY. SportingFlyer  talk  17:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.