Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michal Gogola


 * 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. This process has run for four weeks and nobody has presented or inserted sufficient independent sources to bring this minor sports figure towards meeting general notability. BusterD (talk) 01:32, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Michal Gogola

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

Not a notable water polo player. Fails WP:GNG Emery Cool21 (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. Emery Cool21 (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Slovakia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep a quick search finds this, this and this all about this person. The latter is a lengthy interview which states he was not only a player, but the team captain and manager.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 11:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:20, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete interviews are not GNG qualifying sources. The person making a statement about themself in an interview is not something we can use to say things, Wikipedia needs to be based on what others have written about someone, not what they say abnout themself, and an itnterview is always the later. We do not have sourcing that actually rises to the level of passing GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well that's untrue. Please see WP:BASIC. For example, the third link I've provided is from SME - "one of the most widely read mainstream broadsheets in Slovakia". Please can you link to the policy/guidelines that actually say "interviews are not GNG qualifying sources".  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 14:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Because of their nature, interviews are often neither secondary nor independent; so while not explicit, it is a reasonable interpretation that such sources should not count towards a GNG pass (there was a recent discussion at WT:N about this). wjematherplease leave a message... 16:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Do you have the link?  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 16:34, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Except for any significant non-primary commentary by the interviewer, the content in interviews is not considered secondary or independent; this has been the standard for a long time. JoelleJay (talk) 20:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:01, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't see how this doesn't pass WP:GNG. There are plenty of sources based around this player, such as the ones linked above and other sources such as this, this, and this. And yes, in my findings, it does also say that he is the team captain and manager.
 * Cheers! -- WellThisIs TheReaper  Grim 16:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @WellThisIsTheReaper, you linked to Slovak waterpolo's own website and a bulletin released by his team. Those are not independent sources and therefore cannot contribute to notability. JoelleJay (talk) 17:39, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  333-blue  at 06:11, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. Of the 6 sources presented above, 5 are passing mentions in routine coverage, so do not contribute towards GNG. The other (SME) is an interview transcript that contains no independent commentary, so also does not contribute towards GNG. If these are the best sources that can be found, this article should be deleted or redirected to an appropriate list article. wjematherplease leave a message... 12:41, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Water polo at the 2000 Summer Olympics – Men's tournament as an alternative to deletion. --Enos733 (talk) 22:39, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. The first two sources provided here are identical routine injury reports; it's not remotely encyclopedic to note every injury an athlete reports, so why would that info be considered SIGCOV? The rest of the sources that I can access are routine coverage and an interview. Fails GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 23:11, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Leaning towards Keep. When doing my WP:BEFORE I noticed that all of the sources linked here, and on Google News were published after 2010. If this discussion were occurring back in the early 2000's we probably would be able to find more acceptable sources. I have not !voted Keep as I am aware that the burden of proof is on me to find sources. I'll see what I can do tomorrow. Scorpions13256 (talk) 05:04, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: I found this by limiting my search to pages before 2014. Pinging . Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:22, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * That's literally the same source Lugnuts linked above that others have determined is not sufficient for GNG due to the limited independent commentary. JoelleJay (talk) 17:33, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I must have shared the wrong source then. Scorpions13256 (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I also found this. It appears that he is on the National Water Polo team of Slovakia. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Discussion still active. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark (talk) 03:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep He meets WP:NWP. Pinging a second time. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:33, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Scorpions13256, that is not a valid keep reason. NWP is not a notability guideline; the relevant guideline is GNG/SPORTCRIT, which requires SIGCOV in multiple IRS regardless of sporting achievement. JoelleJay (talk) 17:29, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know that. I have been out of the loop for some time. Scorpions13256 (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I will do more checking immediately. Scorpions13256 (talk) 18:06, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have struck my comments but not !voted Delete. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - Coverage of the subject is neither significant, nor independent. Interviews do not establish notability or act as reliable circumstances except in rare instances as already discussed above. MaxnaCarta (talk) 08:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - Insufficient independent coverage to argue for retention. If good sources are identified, please ping me. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:00, 21 July 2022 (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.