Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurt Ams


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:11, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Kurt Ams

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD on the grounds that he passes WP:NFOOTY. However, referees are not covered by NFOOTY, only players and managers. Consensus through historic AfDs is that referees in any league / competition need to satisfy GNG alone. Initial concern therefore remains, there is insufficient significant, third-party coverage of the individual to satisfy GNG Fenix down (talk) 11:50, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Fenix down (talk) 11:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 11:57, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG, Unless he has officiated top level international matches or received substantial coverage, then delete. Govvy (talk) 13:07, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment officiating at international level is no guarantee that a referee will meet WP:GNG. Hack (talk) 14:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * reply Officiating at a world cup or European tournament, I would go on to say that should pass a certain level. Hence why I said top. Govvy (talk) 15:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The level they've refereed is irrelevant, they need to pass WP:GNG. Hack (talk) 11:51, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, no evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources. Hack (talk) 14:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Refs are unlikely to meet GNG unless they screw up bigtime at least twice. This article barely even claims notability. ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 18:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete doesn't meet WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:01, 17 March 2018 (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.