Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Hun-Jong


 * 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 all due to WP:ATHLETE failure - no problem with bundling these at all. пﮟოьεԻ  5  7  13:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Kim Hun-Jong

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

These all fail WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG as the Korea National League is only semi-pro. Contested PRODs. Spiderone 12:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Jeon Kwang-Cheol
 * Choi Chul-Wook
 * Go Bong-Keun
 * Park Mal-Bong
 * Lee Sang-Keun
 * Kim Chang-Hwi
 * Jo Hong-Sang
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Spiderone  12:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all as they look to fail WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG. GiantSnowman 13:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all - all articles are about athletes that play in a lower-tier semi-pro league. I can't find significant coverage in reliable sources of any of these (though my lack of Korean language skills is surely a limiting factor). Jogurney (talk) 14:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep according to WP:ATHLETE, an athlete is notable if they play at the fully professional OR the highest ameteur level; the football leagues in question are semi-pro, so if we treat that as amateur, then they'd be playing in the highest Korean amateur football leagues; if they're not amateur, then they play at the pro level, passing WP:ATHLETE either way.

Also see WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias, and that project page in general, for discussion about being careful that people notable in non-English-speaking countries don't fall below our 'notability-radar' --Arkelweis (talk) 15:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm sure the "highest amateur" rule only applies if there is no professional alternative. These players could turn professional if they wanted to. Spiderone  15:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you mean, "if they could find anyone that would pay them to", rather than, "if they wanted to". I'm sure that would want to play in a fully professional league if they could get the opportunity. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete all There's no inherent notability in semi-pro athletes of any sort, although they can attempt to prove notability the hard way. WP:ATHLETE was rewritten to close out the idea that "highest amateur level" meant that all members of a college sports team or other amateur competition were "entitled" to their own shrine page.  The text says "People who have competed at the fully professional level of a sport, or a competition of equivalent standing in a non-league sport such as swimming, golf or tennis." and "People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships."  If any of these fellows are professionals who ever played in the K-League, they would probably qualify, but the Korean National League is not fully professional.  Mandsford (talk) 15:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete All - Per nom. GauchoDude (talk) 00:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep All not reasonable to bundle all these players together. Reasonable for Korean 2nd level players to generally be kept due to stature of football in country. Eldumpo (talk) 08:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I would say it is reasonable since they all fail the same criteria and all play for the same club. The Korea National League is clearly a semi-pro league which violates WP:ATHLETE automatically. Furthermore, all the articles lack sources and have no assertion of notability. Spiderone  08:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete All - Per nom. Govvy (talk) 17:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all - fail WP:ATHLETE and WP:GNG - none fully pro league Steve-Ho (talk) 18:24, 6 October 2009 (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.