Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Namariau


 * 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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. The arguments both to keep and delete were sub-optimal cf. "Meets GNG" / "Doesn't meet GNG"; a more substantial discussion occurred after the first relist, but I don't see any agreement what to do. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Joseph Namariau

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

Fails WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football,  and Oceania. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,Rosguill talk 23:59, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Question: has the nominator fulfilled WP:BEFORE? Jack4576 (talk) 05:19, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - sources added.--IdiotSavant (talk) 09:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per above. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 15:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sources are passing mentions, routine transactional reports, and non-independent PR. GNG is not met. JoelleJay (talk) 20:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep passes GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Clearly fails GNG, as there is an evident lack of notability. CycloneYoris talk! 10:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 01:10, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of SIGCOV Alvaldi (talk) 19:25, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - meets GNG. Searching Proquest and Wikipedia Library, this could be ref bombed with a couple of dozen Fiji Times articles - the three already in the article are more than enough to count for one GNG source. The article from the Vanuatu Daily Post is very good in itself, for a second GNG source - this is neither a passing mention nor a routine transactional report. He also played in a third country, the Solomon Islands - but there's only trivial coverage from 2014 in the Solomon Star. Can you review the sources again, User:GiantSnowman. Nfitz (talk) 06:05, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * the Daily Post article about a uniform being handed over is not significant - which of the other sources do you believe are significant? GiantSnowman 16:11, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I disagree and believe that the Daily Post article is significant, as it not only talks about the uniforms, but then segues into a discussion about Namariau himself, including that "Joseph Namaraiu is a well-known former Tafea football club striker and represented the National team and Fiji football teams in various regional tournaments during his time in footballing days, until he retired in 2014". Nfitz (talk) 23:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * They do not "add up" to GNG, that's not how GNG has worked in any of these AfDs and you know it. JoelleJay (talk) 21:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't appreciate the the failure to assume good faith, User:JoelleJay. In the notability guideline WP:NBASIC, it says that if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. You can't just selectively cherry-pick the notability guidelines that don't support the case for deletion. Nfitz (talk) 23:53, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * You were not citing NBASIC, you were citing GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 17:25, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This isn't a legal forum, I paraphrased NBASIC - which obviously wasn't going to fully cut it given it was all from the same publication. Do we now discount any KEEP that says an article is notable given the significant references, because it doesn't reference GNG? Anyhow, I'm glad you are now satisfied with my keep - even if you don't agree with it. Nfitz (talk) 23:42, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.