Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gastón Álvarez Suárez


 * 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.  → Call me  Hahc  21  04:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Gastón Álvarez Suárez

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD'd with reason: No cites or claims that subject meets WP:GNG. No cites or claims that subject meets WP:NFOOTY by having ever played a game Once played 10 minutes in a fully professional league. PROD removed without article being improved. Searches indicate routine local coverage, directory listings, social media. Subject appears to have failed to even get game time at top-flight Chilean club and so has been loaned out to lower league. Do not see substantial coverage from independent reliable sources. Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 00:03, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 March 16.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 01:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 12:13, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL (I'd [reviously missed the '10' for minutes played on Soccerway). Needs improving, not deleting. As a current player I'm willing to give benefit of the doubt, but if GNG is not met in a few years we should look to delete, plenty of consensus at AFD that shows barely scraping through NFOOTBALL is not sufficient. GiantSnowman 21:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * So, if I may paraphrase, "not notable now, but could well become notable in a few years". I agree with this view, but it seems like an argument for deletion. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 23:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Player has not played in fully professional league, nor played senior international football, so fails NFOOTY. Player has played 10 minutes of football in a fully professional league two seasons ago. No indication of any other achievements garnering significant reliable coverage to achieve GNG. There is some level of coverage beyond match reports as noted below, but as remarked, it is more indicative of the media noticing him and the footballing family he comes from than throwing a specific spotlight on him to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 13:53, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. According to all three references present in the article, two explicitly, the third by implication only without a paid subscription, the player has made one, brief, appearance for his owning club in the Primera División Argentina, a well-known league with a fair bit of media coverage, and more relevantly, one listed at WP:FPL. Which means he passes the football-specific notability guideline. As is standard practice with young players at big clubs, he's currently loaned out to a smaller club to get experience. My first few google results threw up a couple of not entirely trivial articles, e.g. http://www.diaadia.com.ar/deportes/alvarez-suarez-vuelvo-voy, http://mundod.lavoz.com.ar/futbol/la-dinastia-suarez-copo-belgrano, which indicate he has at least been noticed by the media. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this, it does appear that subject once played 10 minutes in a pro league; I've updated my nomination accordingly. However, still seems to fail WP:GNG--the "not entirely trivial articles" you mention do not seem to be from reliable sources. Your argument suggests that this is a young player who has a good chance of becoming notable in the future. Fine--if and when that happens, let's have this article back. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You may have forgotten that WP:N makes no distinction between GNG and a subject-specific guideline when it comes to a presumption of notability. I quote, with original formatting (WP:NFOOTBALL is one of the subject-specific guidelines mentioned as "listed in the box on the right"):
 * A topic is presumed to merit an article if it meets the general notability guideline below, and is not excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy.
 * A topic is also presumed notable if it meets the criteria outlined in a subject-specific guideline listed in the box on the right.
 * I wasn't trying to demonstrate GNG with those two articles, just to confirm it was pretty easy to find media coverage of the player. However, I'm surprised you question the reliability of those sources. The about-page of the former lists its editorial staff with contact details and clarifies it is the website of a Córdoba daily newspaper (tabloid in appearance, certainly, but so are most English regional newspapers these days) with postal address, phone numbers, and formally audited circulation. The latter is from the sports section of the website of La Voz del Interior, a major Argentinian newspaper. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * NFOOTY is a subsection of WP:NSPORT which says "...the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article that is on articles for deletion..." 10 lousy minutes? On to GNG: Your first cite looks like routine local coverage from an uncertain source, and your second is cute, a bit of fluff, an interview with the subject's actually notable uncle. It does have a few sentences about this nephew, but, for me, we are still quite a bit short of substantial coverage from reliable, independent sources. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * "10 lousy minutes", rather more than the nomination originally claimed, and rather more than the two delete-!voters apparently noticed when they presumably checked the references, is enough to pass WP:NFOOTY. Whether it should be is another matter, hence my posting of links to a couple of articles which might help anyone interested to make something approaching a decent short article on the player. I'm no fan of one-sentence sub-stubs. The closing admin may share your view that although the subject passes the subject-specific criteria, we still need in addition to demonstrate GNG here and now from readily available online sources that meet your standards of reliability and depth. They may not. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 10:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per Struway2 Nfitz (talk) 02:55, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge selectively, as nominator. A redirect and added sentence to Matías Suárez, the subject's notable uncle, should suffice, unless and until subject establishes independent notability. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Given he does meet WP:NFOOTY then that's already been established. Nfitz (talk) 00:19, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No, if a person meets the sports notability guideline, then it is likely that they will meet the GNG and thus be notable (by WP standards). Take a look at Q1 and Q2 of the FAQ at the top of WP:NSPORTS. Meeting NSPORTS but not the GNG is not sufficient. James086 Talk  15:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  → Call me  Hahc  21  01:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Seems to meet WP:NFOOTBALL JMHamo (talk) 14:17, 27 March 2014 (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.