Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Henderson (2nd nomination)


 * 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. The discussion has run out of steam. Everyone who wanted to say something has done so, and there's no agreement as to whether the subject meets WP:GNG or WP:NFOOTY. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  20:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Emily Henderson
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

I believe that since the previous discussion closed as no consensus and since more than 4 years have passed, I am okay to start a second discussion on Henderson. In the last 4 years, it does not appear that any further coverage has developed and Henderson still appears to fail WP:GNG.

I am of the belief that none of the sources currently cited show significant coverage addressing Henderson directly and in depth. The Futsal4all source is not sufficient. Outside of the article, I have found a Telegraph source, a Perth Now picture and Women Soccer. All of these mentions are completely trivial and there is no depth at all.

I therefore request that anyone voting keep in this discussion please provide WP:THREE best sources from reliable publications that clearly show enough depth focused on Henderson to demonstrate WP:GNG. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:43, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Source assessment - One source that has a small amount of coverage while the rest have next to no coverage. I cannot see how WP:GNG is met. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails GNG and NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 15:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I still believe that playing in the top-level league in Australia which is almost fully professional and getting closer every season, gives a fine enough presumption of notability as say representing a Pacific nation once (not even mentioned on Soccerway) and not doing anything after that. It's a shame to waste time in putting up these AfD's instead of using this time constructively to create and expand articles. --SuperJew (talk) 16:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Please can you link me to a relevant policy/guideline that this article meets? Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure - WP:GNG. Emily Henderson has 12 references in her article. On the other hand, for example Jais Malsarani has 2 and yet no one has considered sending his article to AfD. --SuperJew (talk) 18:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You claim that playing in the W-League provides a presumption of notability and I'm curious as to where that presumption comes from. For example Rachael Smith appeared in the same league and there was clear consensus to delete per GNG failure. Same with Ashlee Faul, Lauren Chilvers and Jodie Bain. How is this case any different? GNG was why Sammie Wood, Stella Rigon and Angela Fimmano were kept so if a similar amount of sourcing could be provided for Henderson then maybe we can keep this article too but I'd much rather work on evidence of notability rather than presumptions in an AfD. For what it's worth, there are many articles on GNG-failing male footballers that get deleted every week despite passing NFOOTBALL. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:03, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I am somewhat surprised (and concerned at the same time) that someone with almost 100K Edits does not know of Other stuff exists. W-League does not provide GNG at all. CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You are capable of bringing to light the essay you think is relevant if you want, but no need to belittle me in the process. I am well aware of this essay and will highlight for you This essay is not a standard reply that can be hurled against anyone you disagree with who has made a reference to how something is done somewhere else. --SuperJew (talk) 22:05, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep as per the rationale shared by talk. Bebopjohnson (talk) 17:00, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom, fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:09, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per . Can I just say that some editors' zeal for AfD'ing women footballers on WP can be better spent elsewhere? Especially in this case where it had happened once already and where the footballer in question already retired from playing when the first AfD discussion occurred, so it's unlikely there would be additional coverage in the interim. Honestly it feels all of our time could be better spent doing some actual improvements rather than this over and over again... Seany91 (talk) 12:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Please can you provide three sources discussing Henderson directly and in detail? Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, if we are to disregard GNG and NFOOTBALL for female footballers, what would be an alternative guideline? Or do we just keep all female footballers as long as we can prove that they exist and played at least one game somewhere at some point? If the current guidelines are a problem, then that's fine to state that, but, as far as I can see, nobody has come up with a viable alternative. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Neither you, nor any of the other deletionists, have answered the counter: can you provide three sources discussing Jais Malsarani directly and in detail? (And the point is to show that there is a double-standard. If we agree on that, I'd like to see your zeal for mass AfD'ing such men footballers too and I'm sure that the "Keep" arguments there will be relevant to such women footballer AfD's such as this one). --SuperJew (talk) 12:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Malsarani is completely non-notable from a GNG perspective but meets NFOOTBALL as an international player. Wikipedia community consensus is that all international players are considered notable regardless of GNG. Please note that this applies to female footballers such as Victoria Balomenos, Linda Oe and Tessy Bamberg-Schitter as well so it's not in fact a sexist double standard at all. Henderson only has youth caps so this same consensus does not apply. Any male footballer that passes NFOOTBALL but has no caps and clearly fails GNG can and, in most cases, will be deleted as even a cursory glance at recent AfDs will show. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Please, there's no difference notability-wise between playing 5 minutes in an international match between Vanuatu and Fiji and between playing 5 minutes in a Premier League match or in a W-League match. --SuperJew (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting per Deletion review/Log/2021 April 17. Any uninvolved admin may reclose this immediately (or, at their discretion, allow it to run for longer if they feel that's needed).
 * Delete as she fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Dougal18 (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom. fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL and the keep camp are yet to come up with anything better than WP:OSE. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 19:25, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. GNG has not been demonstrated, and keeping an article that also doesn't even meet NFOOTY only perpetuates harmful stereotypes that women are only capable of notability if we lower our standards. JoelleJay (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 23:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC) Keep - per Super Jew Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 08:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * SuperJew's argument mainly focused on the perceived unfairness that Jais Malsarani is allowed to have an article but Henderson isn't. Worth noting that Malsarani has been deleted since that comment. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , we'll note that his article was deleted due to doubt cast over his appearance for Vanuatu - the actual WP:GNG met by him is the same amount - no new sources were found or disappeared. I can find you plenty of other examples of what we previously thought the case was for Jais Malsarani - for example King Moe (great name btw!). Therefore still the main argument stays: a player can play 1 minute for a Pacific nation team and you'd argue for their keeping regardless of if any sources covering them at all, but for a woman playing in Australia's top league, you require a whole heap of sources to prove notability. --SuperJew (talk) 18:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * - this presumption of notability for playing international football applies to women as well as men, so is not a sexist double standard. For example, Oloa Tofaeono is a woman with 1 cap for American Samoa. A search reveals no significant coverage of her either, just passing mentions in match reports as with King Moe. If Henderson has played international football then she would be presumed notable but she hasn't therefore we must look for evidence of notability rather than a presumption... Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That's part of the issue here... it's a mix of gender issue and domestic v international issue. But something is wrong when a sub who came on for the last 3 minutes of the match where the 191st ranked team lost 8-1 to the 161st ranked team (rankings slightly anachronistic as of today) in front of 140 people is inherently more notable than a squad player in a top-10 ranking country's top league in front of crowds ranging between 300-714 (at minimum twice the crowd and that's not including TV watchers). It's honestly quite a shock that said "international player" gets a free pass, while it is a battle to try and keep the top league squad player. Bottom line btw, I'm not trying to say "delete the 'international player'" either. I would be happy for both to stay - as this is an online encyclopedia, I don't see the problem with some articles being only a couple of paragraphs as that is what is known about them, while others are longer. And I don't see what is burning for a few editors to push many articles to PROD and AfD. --SuperJew (talk) 21:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * In all fairness, neither should get a free pass. If there is no WP:SIGCOV about them, then they simply fail WP:GNG and should be deleted. Alvaldi (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm sneaking in before this is re-closed, but I did spend some time on a source search for the DRV just to see if a mistake was made but unfortunately I could not find any articles which demonstrated she passes WP:GNG. SportingFlyer  T · C  17:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG and SuperJew. WP:NFOOTBALL excludes the vast majority of women's top leagues around the world and is not reliable - even top leagues like the W-League (Australia), of which Henderson played in, and are broadcast internationally. Hmlarson (talk) 21:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The nomination is not based on NFOOTBALL but on a failure of GNG. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Ahh, thanks for changing your repetitive nominations. Hmlarson (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - Passing WP:NFOOTBALL does not mean that a subject is automatically notable, it only means that the subject is supposedly likely to have the significant coverage to pass WP:GNG. Male, femlale, international, professional or amateur - does't matter. The subject still has to have significant coverage which Henderson unfortunately does not. Alvaldi (talk) 22:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - I note that the assessment table above simply ignores the half-dozen or so sources that aren't available online. With the known WP:BIAS that exist with women footballers, it's hard to objectively apply the same standards that are used for males. That being said, we have one source that's borderline, and years of play at the highest level of the sport. And lots of peripheral media mentions. If this was a male player, it could go both ways, but to counter bias, we shouldn't be quick to delete articles for women players that have survived here already for years, and do have sources. Also, I fixed a broken reference in the article. Nfitz (talk) 23:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - GNG is applied equally to both genders. We have no idea what the Hills Gazette sources contain and therefore can't consider them for GNG. Mere mentions of her don't make her pass GNG, significant coverage does. An article being here for years/having sources are not reasons to keep. Dougal18 (talk) 10:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: just because one editor cannot access a source doesn't mean it should be excluded from consideration: WP:PAYWALL. Seany91 (talk) 10:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - And this idea that "GNG is applied equally to both genders" might be an aspiration but is patently untrue. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 10:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The Hills Avon Valley Gazette is a newspaper for a local region of WA about 40km east of Perth. I can't find those articles online, but I'd expect a professional sportsperson to have received coverage from places other than the place they came from. SportingFlyer  T · C  10:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Can't wait until this same standard is applied to the academy boys scraping by NFOOTY with a few appearances off the bench in, say, USL League One... Seany91 (talk) 08:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , that's what almost all the delete !voters here are trying to do... We don't want articles on non-notable male athletes either. JoelleJay (talk) 16:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ...and yet female footballers (and women in general) continue to be disproportionately & negatively impacted by WP notability criteria, so take that how you want. Seany91 (talk) 17:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why the focus here is on the missing Hills Avon Valley Gazette references. The missing reference that jumps out is the June 21 2010 reference from The West Australian, one of the oldest and largest newspapers in Australia. As for GNG applying equal to "both" genders (and I don't understand the need for a binary reference here) - that's only true if the media reported equally on all genders. I hope no one here believes that they do! Nfitz (talk) 17:37, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets GNG per the sources in the article. The fact that they're not available online is not a reason for deletion. Smartyllama (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The ones not available online would cover her youth career and wouldn't count towards notability per WP:YOUNGATH. SportingFlyer  T · C  14:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If the issue is GNG as you say, then YOUNGATH is irrelevant. You can't have it both ways. Smartyllama (talk) 18:54, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Which sources show significant coverage addressing Henderson directly and in depth? Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure what "having it both ways" means. GNG is the issue. WP:YOUNGATH tells us that teenage athletes have to have very substantial coverage in order to be notable. If there are no GNG-qualifying sources from her professional career, YOUNGATH means we don't keep on the grounds that her local paper covered her amateur youth sports career. SportingFlyer  T · C  13:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Still having some good conversation here. Let's do one more relist and hopefully it'll be closed.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: I mean if that league isnt fully pro then she fails the relevance, and she also hasnt done anything in 4 years.Muur (talk) 22:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The league she is playing in has no bearing on her notability. A player playing in an amateur league can be notable while a player in a professional league can be non-notable. Alvaldi (talk) 09:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This vote totally goes against WP:GNG and should not be considered. Seany91 (talk) 06:35, 13 May 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.