Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fabrizio Tavano (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 keep. Consensus is that this topic fails NFOOTY, but the arguments that he now passes GNG have not been refuted, as those arguing that GNG has been met have provided specific examples, while those stating GNG is not met have not given any argument, much less compelling ones, why those sources should not be contemplated when measuring GNG. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Fabrizio Tavano
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG. Referenced articles are routine. Simione001 (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Simione001 (talk) 09:48, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhkohh (talk) 13:04, 19 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete Recreation of deleted article. No change in status regarding meeting NFOOTY, still fails. DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 10:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as per result of the discussion last October.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:49, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete and SALT - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 15:17, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Tavano actually satisfies WP:GNG due to ongoing significant non-routine coverage about him and is a classic example of the type of footballer who should have an article on this site even though he doesn't pass WP:NFOOTY, especially due to his multiple appearances in a major international tournament. I know this will be another "NFOOTY not satisfied AfD" where users don't get to WP:GNG or claim the coverage on him is simply routine, but I disagree with this wholeheartedly, as the type of coverage on him goes beyond why we assume WP:GNG for other players.    SportingFlyer  talk  20:24, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm with while they do°n't pass WP:NFOOTY there is enough there to pass WP:GNG. This player has played at the Club World Cup three times and has articles about him that aren't just routine. We must remember to look past previous deletion discussions and vote on what is in current articles. I think  has done an alright job on this players article.  NZFC  (talk) 23:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep As per fails WP:NFOOTY but scrapes though WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Per, meets WP:GNG due to non WP:ROUTINE coverage, and participation in the FIFA Club World Cup, arguably the most prestigious international club football/soccer tournament in the World. Quidster4040 (talk) 13:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as per discussion last October. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:GNG due to extensive non-routine coverage from FIFA, ESPN and Vavel among others as shown on his talk page, as well as competing in the FIFA Club World Cup on numerous occasions - as stated, the most prestigious club tournament in his country of birth. Quazarrr (talk) 05:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Still technically fails WP:NFOOTY, but the provided sources are enough to get him over the WP:GNG hump. Smartyllama (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2018 (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.