Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Rossiter


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Jordan Rossiter

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT still... JMHamo (talk) 03:08, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 03:09, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. He has not played in a fully pro league or received significant coverage, meaning the article fails WP:NSPORT and WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 05:46, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 12:39, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - passes WP:GNG. A Google News search finds over 200 articles, including features articles about him. Nfitz (talk) 13:29, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - Most of it being routine news coverage JMHamo (talk) 14:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - sure ... most, but not all. And not all of 200 articles is significant enough for GNG. Nfitz (talk) 15:40, 10 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - per above, has not played in a fully professional league or senior international football. No significant in depth coverage, just the usual brief coverage of a young player yet to play in a significant match. Fenix down (talk) 17:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
 * And that may be the case. But where are you folks who vote delete based on brief coverage, when there's very clear evidence of significant international features articles, such as in the AFDs for Jack Wilshere previously, and Quillan Roberts‎ Nfitz (talk) 04:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment -, you may wish to refresh your knowledge of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The fact that Quillian Roberts is also at AfD suggests that at least one other editor thinks that there is not the significant level of coverage you claim. Fenix down (talk) 13:30, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see no need for mentioning WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS ... I simply wondered where all these people who argue that a player doesn't meet WP:GNG are when they remain silent for cases where WP:GNG is very clearly met; I certainly wasn't invoking that here. There are editors here, who will 100% ignore meeting WP:GNG if they don't meet WP:FOOTYN. The classic case being some who are participating in this debate, voting to delete Jack Wilshere's page shortly before his Arsenal debut, despite being featured in hundreds of long international newspaper stories. I don't think there's ever been a more clear case of a player meeting WP:GNG yet failing WP:FOOTYN, and yet some ignore process and only care about WP:FOOTYN. Nfitz (talk) 20:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NFOOTY failure. Number   5  7  19:32, 13 January 2014 (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.