Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Campbell (footballer born 1988)


 * 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. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

John Campbell (footballer born 1988)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article prodded because player had never played at a fully-pro level, thus failing WP:NFOOTY, and because there wasn't enough media coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. Creator removed prod with rationale on article talk page. Struway2 (talk) 17:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Struway2 (talk) 17:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, fails WP:NFOOTBALL and WP:GNG. GiantSnowman 17:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Argyle 4 Life  talk  18:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, some sources
 * "Ball hails Campbell". The Telegraph
 * "Five-star stuff from Benfield's John Campbell". ChronicleLive.
 * "Campbell Can't Wait To Face Toon". Newcastle United.
 * "Darlington net Newcastle Benfield striker John Campbell". BBC.
 * "Whirlwind 12 months at Darlington has John Campbell in dreamland". The Journal.
 * jorgenev 18:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nothing but WP:ROUTINE coverage. Argyle 4 Life  talk  18:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Routine does not apply.The articles are specific on him and reactionary. Not something like a 'game score report' as suggested by WP:ROUTINE. jorgenev 01:12, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, fails WP:NFOOTY. Also fails WP:GNG due to a lack of significant media coverage. Sources provided fails WP:NTEMP. --Jimbo[online] 00:22, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * NTEMP hardly applies, the articles cover him at multiple stages in his career. jorgenev 01:14, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment re sources, low-level football in England, and media coverage thereof. Newcastle Benfield, Campbell's club before Darlington, plays at the ninth tier of football in England, in front of about 100 people, and the local paper, the Chronicle, has a weekly roundup of the league's results, giving a namecheck to anyone who did anything out of the ordinary. The agency piece on the Telegraph website quotes a former teammate at junior level telling the Swindon local paper that Campbell did OK in a trial with that club's reserve team. The BBC routinely report signings for clubs at sixth tier and above, so they will mention him joining Darlington. The Journal is the local paper doing a piece on one of the local team's players. That's what local papers do. NUFC hung their piece leading up to a pre-season friendly against Darlington on the contrast between Campbell, who they released at age 14, and Andy Carroll, who they didn't, and who went on to set an English transfer record. In England, this is the sort of routine sports journalism that semi-pro football gets. It certainly isn't the sort of significant coverage needed to pass WP:BIO.
 * If the player had done anything to achieve notability via his football career, it would be useful background material to fill out his biography, but he hasn't yet. When I first proposed deletion of this article, I told its creator that if I'd come across a player with a lengthy career at top non-league level but nothing in a fully-professional league, I wouldn't put it into the deletion process despite his failing WP:NFOOTY, but this player has only 12 appearances even in the Conference (fifth tier, not fully-pro). cheers, Struway2 (talk) 09:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Interesting comment/lecture, but this isn't actually what WP:ROUTINE says. Keep 94.14.239.25 (talk) 20:35, 6 August 2011 (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.