Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Cheeseman


 * 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. Whilst the keep votes are technically correct that the player passes NFOOTY, the stronger arguments presented here are that the presumption of GNG that this provides is incorrect in this case. No sources indicating sufficient coverage to satisfy GNG have been presented. Given the player is now retired it seems unlikely this situation will change in the future. There is consensus through AfD that where players only barely pass NFOOTY and have retired that they need to clearly show GNG. This is not the case here. Fenix down (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Jeremy Cheeseman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

28-year-old footballer played 3 pro games in 2012–2013 for a total of 23 minutes (SW). No SIGCOV at all. The closest is this three paragraph local newspaper article about him doing a guest clinic for 8-year-olds, and the rest is game report, college game report, high school game report, high school game report, and this article about a different guy with the same name who robbed a bank, which is honestly the most interesting part of the BEFORE search. 3 games, 23 minutes is too weak of an NFOOTY pass, and this subject completely fails GNG. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as nom. Leviv&thinsp;ich 04:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment You can't cast a second delete vote, your AfD nomination is considered a delete vote. Govvy (talk) 09:04, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep – Dayton Dutch Lions were a fully professional club during his appearances for the team, therefore he meets NFOOTY guidelines. UncleTupelo1 (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. (Nom consulted me prior to nomination) NFOOTY merely creates a presumption of notability. In this case it is clear we do not have SIGCOV, and not do we expect any future coverage here. Subject had played a bit in the lower rungs of the US minor leagues (pro in terms of play, but not competitive and hardly covered by anyone - the almost sole purpose of these minor leagues is player farming). To put the lack of interest in perspective - avg. atttnedance for the Dutch Lions is around 500. Has since retired. Absent sourcing establishing SIGCOV, this is a clear delete.Icewhiz (talk) 18:14, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment The USL gets a reasonable amount of coverage? It's certainly not solely in existence as a "farm league". He played in a league that meets the NFOOTY guidlines, so not sure the team's attendance at the time comes in to it. UncleTupelo1 (talk) 23:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Does the USL get coverage? If so, produce in depth sources on this player (who did not play all that much). NFOOTY merely states which leagues are likely to meet GNG. This guy is borderline for NFOOTY (did not play that much, borderline league). If there were SIGCOV - producing 3-4 high quality, independent, reliable sources would be easy.Icewhiz (talk) 04:36, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per prior consensus (see Articles for deletion/Abdoulaye Sanogo among others) a minimal amount of play in a fully-pro league is not enough to meet WP:NFOOTBALL when the article comprehensively fails WP:GNG as this article does. I could only find the local Patch article mentioned above in terms of non-routine coverage, but there's simply not enough there. Jogurney (talk) 00:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL; needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 11:53, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Absent significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject - which are lacking here (failing WP:GNG) - such an improvement is unlikely - impossible even given sourcing quality required for a WP:BLP. Keep by NFOOTY (merely presumption of GNG) means nothing for borderline NFOOTY players who are being challenged for not having anything approaching SIGCOV. Show us the sources, if you want it kept. At least 3-4 high quality in-depth sources. Icewhiz (talk) 12:18, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. SportingFlyer  T · C  00:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.