Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hocine Gaham


 * 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 delete. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:13, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hocine Gaham

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NBASKETBALL and WP:GNG John from Idegon (talk) 00:03, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete The case for keep, I think, comes down to the utter ridiculousness of WP:NBASKETBALL. A player who played one minute in the three-game 1952 Yugoslav First Basketball League is deemed notable by that standard, but someone like Hocine Gaham who has played multiple games at FIBA's AfroBasket is not notable (in addition to being a regular starter on the best team in the Algerian basketball league). The spirit of NBASKETBALL which opts for including marginal players certainly warrants keeping Hocine Gaham. However, since I can't figure out such utterly ridiculous standards, I will instead opt for (the less ridiculous?) GNG standard. Newsbank has 27 hits, and 20 of those refer to the 2015 AfroBasket tournament. I couldn't find any player profiles or paragraphs about his work that moved beyond ordinary sports coverage ("Gaham added 4 points" or something). Searched three Algerian newspapers and couldn't find anything substantive there either. So, seems to fail GNG. AbstractIllusions (talk) 18:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * All of the sports exceptions to GNG need to be looked at IMO, but basketball is the worst. John from Idegon (talk) 19:46, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe worth starting a discussion at the village pump, because I tend to agree with the concerns expressed here. Apologies for being off-topic to the discussion at hand, but its in a place where the suggestion will be seen... TonyBallioni (talk) 05:58, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree with AbstractIllusion's analysis re: GNG and NSPORT. GNG is the easiest to test here, and he fails that. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:58, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I have to agree we have created ridiculously low inclusion standards for some sports that have lead to the survival of totally worthless articles that say nothing and have victually no sources. However Gaham is not notable by either GNG or basketball notability standards and the article should be deleted.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:37, 22 December 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.