Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medy Elito


 * 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 both. Chetblong T C 01:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Medy Elito

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested PROD, article about a 17-year-old Colchester United guy who failed WP:BIO. The PROD was contested under the claim that he played the U17 World Cup, which, in my opinion, is definitely not an assertion of notability. Angelo (talk) 16:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I am nominating for deletion for the same reason the following articles:
 * Jonathan Franks


 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Angelo (talk) 16:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete He doesn't pass WP:FOOTY/Notability, but there is this article, if there were a few more, and independent ones, I would change my mind, as he would pass WP:BIO base criteria. John Hayestalk 16:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * However this is not exactly an "independent secondary source", as it was released directly by the English FA. --Angelo (talk) 16:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh for sure, hence my and independent ones above ;) and at the moment he doesn't pass it so it doesn't matter anyway. John Hayestalk 16:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * and Delete Johnathan Franks per nom. John Hayestalk 16:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep It is verifiable through reliable sources that Elito and Franks are contracted with professional teams and have appeared for England at the under 17 World Cup. Elito, Franks Catchpole (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment that's not enough in itself per WP:BIO and WP:FOOTY/Notability. For FOOTY they need to have played for a pro team, for WP:BIO he needs to have played in a pro league, and for WP:BIO they require these reliable sources, which aren't in the articles. John Hayestalk 16:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Arbitrary notability guidelines do not trump core content policies. I see little value in deleting existing articles which are likely to meet these arbitrary guidelines before our current backlogs are cleared. Catchpole (talk) 17:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * In terms of those sources, the colchester one isn't independent of the subject, and the other one is a tertiary source, quoting the newspaper article, which gives a one line mention of him, it could do with more. John Hayestalk 16:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete (both) - whilst they are contracted to professional teams there is no evidence that either of them has (yet) made a first team appearance and the U17 World Cup appearances do not meet the guidelines at WP:FOOTY/Notability which state that appearances at a FIFA tournament should be at senior level.   nancy   (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both Fail WP:BIO, and it is common consensus that youth caps do not confer notability. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  16:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both per nom. robwingfield «T•C» 17:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both per nom. --Fredrick day (talk) 17:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both - per nom -- Alexf42 18:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both per nom. GiantSnowman (talk) 18:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both per nom Ban  Ray  22:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete both, not notable. Punkmorten (talk) 17:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have extended the article and think that it should not be deleted. He has a professional contract with Colchester United (see article for reference for this) and has appeared for the England youth side, the Colchester United reserve side and been selected for the first team as a substitute. For me, this merits keeping the article.Lunalutra (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Clarification - Elito has been named on the substitute's bench, but has not actually made a substitute appearance, so still doesn't pass the notability critera. robwingfield «T•C» 12:13, 1 March 2008 (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.