Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Deans


 * 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. The "keep" opinions must all be discounted, because they all fail to address the reason provided for this deletion request: lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Nobody here seems to be able to find such coverage, and it is by now clear community consensus that such coverage is required for an article.  Sandstein  09:23, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Jordan Deans

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. HeinzMaster (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/ talk ¦ contribs \ 18:59, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, England,  and Caribbean. HeinzMaster (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep User has nominated ~25 articles for deletion in ~20 minutes. Imposisble that a WP:BEFORE was done for each, and the nominations appear to be in bad faith. NemesisAT (talk) 22:41, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:04, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - has clearly decided all players that play for national teams he does not feel confer notability are those which should be deleted. The usual revisionism and elitism around notability in sports Zanoni (talk) 08:17, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 15:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per NemesisAT and Zanoni. In addition, he is a young international capped player with an ongoing career. I look at the other sports WikiProjects and they don't nearly have an article deleted per day, let alone 30. Article may need improvement, but definitely not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 21:17, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - where is the significant coverage? Google News has hits but it's for a Gaelic footballer from Ireland of the same name. Definitely not the same Jordan Deans. ProQuest has plenty of hits but, again, it's for the other Jordan Deans. I can't comment on whether the Irish Jordan Deans meets WP:NGAELIC but from my searches I can say that the Anguillan Jordan Deans fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC due to a complete absence of significant coverage that is independent of the subject. The 'keep' comments above have no relevance to any accepted policy or guideline and appear to be WP:LOCALCONSENSUS or invalid. Comments relating to the number of nominations, the number of caps or the age of the player are irrelevant. The article clearly violates SPORTBASIC which states Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject, excluding database sources. Meeting this requirement alone does not indicate notability, but it does indicate that there are likely sufficient sources to merit a stand-alone article. The article is linked only to database websites with low standards for inclusion and so violates another part of the same guideline which says Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may be used to support content in an article, but it is not sufficient to establish notability. This includes listings in database sources with low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete; fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTSCRIT #5. Number of caps cannot be used to presume notability, per a broad consensus that removed that metric from WP:NSPORT. BilledMammal (talk) 14:59, 7 August 2022 (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.