Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ishan Pandita (4th 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. Missvain (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Ishan Pandita
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Out-of-process AfC move that circumspects a salting. Barely passes WP:NFOOTY; probably doesn't pass GNG. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. I dream of horses (Contribs) Please notify me after replying off my talk page. Thank you. 21:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone  22:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - It is necessary to separate content issues from conduct issues. Deletion is a content issue, and turns on notability guidelines.
 * It appears that the subject has made one appearance in a fully professional game, and that is sufficient.
 * Articles have been deleted three times:
 * A7
 * Articles for deletion/Ishan Pandita (2nd nomination).
 * Articles for deletion/Ishan Pandita (3rd nomination).
 * It appears that he may not have played in a fully professional game at the time of the third deletion discussion, so that the close as Delete was correct, but is no longer governing.
 * I do not like the subordination of special notability guidelines to the general notability guideline. I am aware that I have a minority view.  It is my view that special notability guidelines, which are mostly objective, are to be preferred over general notability, which is vague and leads to contentious AFDs and contentious Deletion Reviews.  However, I will address both special notability and general notability.
 * This appears to be a case where ultras are carrying their fanatical support into Wikipedia. Ultras can be disruptive at football matches and can be disruptive in Wikipedia.
 * The conduct of the fans should not affect the outcome of a content debate.
 * There are occasionally cases where there has been so much support for someone outside of Wikipedia that it makes them famous for being famous, and that should satisfy general notability for those of us who do not like general notability.
 * The subject marginally satisfies association football notability, and marginally satisfies general notability, in spite of the conduct of the ultras.
 * Delete and SALT per last AFD 7 months ago... GiantSnowman 11:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - it appears subset has finally made a professional appearance... GiantSnowman 11:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Subject is 22 years old and has made his professsional debut in a fully professional league on 30th Nov 2020 that is 3 days ago and is currently playing and passes WP:NFOOTY.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - he has only just qualified for NFOOTBALL so consensus has generally been that we keep such articles as there is a reasonable potential for them to make further appearances. If, however, we revisit this in, say, 5 years and they have not made any other appearances then there should be no prejudice in this going through AfD again Spiderone  17:57, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - in fact the weakest of keeps. He marginally passes WP:NFOOTY since he has played two minutes in an FPL at this point but he is on the active squad list and may break through that ceiling at any time - if someone looks at this in a few years and he's out of football and hasn't played another game, this would be a strong delete, which I know isn't really how this works but seems to be the best way to approach this for now. SportingFlyer  T · C  11:59, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per what argued above. ─  The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  15:28, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet any reasonable notability criteria for footballer notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:37, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep [] Player of a notable league Yadav0281 (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Above account was less than an hour old when they !voted. Obviously unfamiliar with AfD procedure. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Has played professional league passes WP:NFOOTY. Priyanjali singh (talk) 13:43, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 00:19, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, generally speaking, the exception to NFOOTY in the case of footballers who played only part of one game ages ago is because they will clearly never play at a professional level again, this person is still close to the start of their career, and therefore keeping the article is preferable for now. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:33, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Has passed WP:NFOOTY this season. Number   5  7  12:51, 9 December 2020 (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.