Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giulia Gwinn


 * 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 for the article to be retained. North America1000 22:33, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Giulia Gwinn

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom and WP:NFOOTBALL. Has only three years worth on stats - none of which have been with a professional club or National team (while a U-17 may be affiliated with a National team, it is not the actual, notable National team of any country). Comatmebro  User talk:Comatmebro 21:14, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:42, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:42, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:42, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone  09:57, 2 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 09:59, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 *  Comment Keep - Cursory U.S. Google search yields numerous articles to reinforce WP:GNG. Good starting point; I'm sure German search would yield even more. Hmlarson (talk) 20:25, 2 October 2016 (UTC) Thanks for help integrating the references. Hmlarson (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 *  Comment - multiple references were added 07:59, 3 October 2016‎
 * Keep - clear GNG currently noted in the article including:
 * Footballer from Ailingen aims high - lengthy article on player in preparation for U17 world cup
 * Giulia Gwinn Wechselt zum SC Freiberg - Article on move to SC Freiberg
 * Giulia Gwinn is nominated relativley breif but nonethelesss useful article on player when aged just 13
 * Janine Minge and Giulia Gwinn create Penalties - article on performance for German U15 team
 * Gwinn and Minge face EM-Quali - specific article on this player and one other in preparation for the U17 European Championship
 * Gwinn and Minge draw attention to themselves - further article on player's youth international performances.
 * My German is not that strong, but these don't seem to be routine match reports and the reporting seems to be done by news outlets at least at a regional level, so seems to me to have received sufficient coverage to satisfy GNG. Additional primary sources in the article such as this can and are used to provide additional detail. Fenix down (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - fulfills GNG. MbahGondrong (talk) 19:38, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - per the logic of the other keep votes. The coverage of this article appears to be of higher significant level. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 05:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Plays in a top-level league in her country. The fact that women's football is underpaid as compared to men's, and therefore are officially "non-professional" is a ridiculous notion for notability. As long as a player who plays 5 minutes in a dead rubber top-level men's league is notable for an article, so should be a woman of the same. --SuperJew (talk) 17:07, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - per WP:GNG. Another in depth article on FIFA website today. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 11:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - passes WP:GNG per previous comments--John, AF4JM (talk) 12:26, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:GNG per Fenix down's sources. Ejgreen77 (talk) 01:56, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep clearly meets WP:GNG with only half of sources provided. Nfitz (talk) 18:15, 8 October 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.