Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murat Sarıgül


 * 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. Claims of sources meeting GNG have been debunked and arguments around non policy based keep reasons do not carry much weight. Spartaz Humbug! 22:17, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Murat Sarıgül

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

Article about footballer with only three appearances in professional football which comprehensively fails WP:GNG. There are certainly passing mentions and routine coverage such as transfer announcements, but no in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Jogurney (talk) 13:56, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football,  and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 15:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:52, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep passes GNG, for example with this non-routine article talking about his career here. Also made a handful of cup appearances on top of League caps.14:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ortizesp (Ortizesp • contribs)
 * Comment - The Hürriyet article is not WP:SIRS (a 4-sentence career recap in what is a routine transfer announcement), and it wouldn't help the article pass the GNG by itself even if it were. Here is a Google translation of the article:


 * "Murat Sarıgül, who was included in Karagümrükspor's Süper Lig squad and was shown as one of the great stars of the future who exhibited successful football, stood out with his technique, game intelligence and mastery of standing balls. Murat Sarıgül, who was expected to have a completely different career, could not catch the expected explosion and his professional league adventure was very short-lived.


 * In the 2020-21 season, Murat played 2 games in 3 Turkish Cups in the Süper Lig at Karagümrük and played against Fenerbahçe and Beşiktaş in friendly matches. Last season 2. The young footballer, who played 4 official matches for Bodrumspor, the champion of the league, was transferred to Beyoğlu Yeni Çarşıspor but did not have a chance here.


 * When Murat Sarıgül did not leave behind the misfortunes, he accepted the offer of Küçükçekmece Sinopspor for the 2022-2023 football season." Jogurney (talk) 15:25, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The Hürriyet article is  a reliable source and it is  significant coverage. Gazozlu (talk) 22:37, 25 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence of notability. The Huriyet source above is Ok, but not enough on its own. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 16:34, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per Ortizesp and recent expansion. He played in fully pro Turkish top flight and has ongoing career. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 18:35, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC make no mention of playing in a fully pro top flight league or having an ongoing career as relevant criteria for notability. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete . I'm with GiantSnowman on this. I'm just about willing to accept the source from Huriyet, but I need to see another source. Ping me if you find it! MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. I also don't believe the one transfer announcement is nearly enough to satisfy GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 23:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep There are more than just transfer announcements, the articles in Silivri Hürhaber and Hürriyet are entirely about him. How to ping?--Gazozlu (talk) 04:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you share the Silivri Hürhaber article you're referring to? MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 18:27, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * https://www.silivrihurhaber.com/super-lig-oyuncusu-kucukcekmece-sinopspor-da-87876.html Gazozlu (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, but isn't Hür Haber an online news portal? I assume this is the portal's page for Silivri. Looking at the article it is nearly taken verbatim from the Hürriyet article (which of course was hosted on the Fanatik sports news portal). There is a small amount of extra text, but overall I'm thinking the Fanatik version is perhaps a summary/snippet from the original Hürriyet article, and so is the Silivri Hür Haber version. So, is this really two instances of coverage, or just one? Neither is particularly in depth in my opinion. Jogurney (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, I could have answered my own question quite easily! Here is the Hürriyet article published 20 September 2022. It is the exact same as the Hür Haber version and the Fanatik version just leaves out a few sentences. Hür Haber and Fanatik published their versions the same day, and Fanatik actually attributed it to Hürriyet. So conclusively, we have one source, not two (or three if you want to try to count Fanatik as having a separate version of the same article). Jogurney (talk) 19:37, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hürriyet =/= Hürhaber
 * I initially thought that Hürriyet copied from the Hürhaber article as well due to some similarities, but upon a closer examination the prose is different and not a copy. Gazozlu (talk) 20:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's almost exactly the same with just a couple of sentences slightly reworded. It's not enough for me, I'm afraid. MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * There is significant copying, one of them just adds in slightly more content and does some minimal rewording. Bolding is identical, underline is substantially similar, italic is a weird phrase one of them repeats.
 * Hurriyet:
 * Silivri Hurhaber: JoelleJay (talk) 22:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I think the Hurhaber article, which has a credited author and is also published earlier was used as a source but not credited by Hurriyet. Then Fanatik came along and credited Hurriyet.
 * This Fanatik article is diffrent however and is also reporting on a diffrent event. Gazozlu (talk) 22:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That is another transaction announcement, derived directly from the club's press release, and is not SIGCOV. JoelleJay (talk) 23:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes well it's a piece that contains a statement from the club. The article is about his leaving the club Bodrumspor. All the news articles that are entirely dedicated to a footballer are almost always articles talking about transfers, transfers are significant events in football. I think if a prominent news agency is bothering to cover the transfer of a player in a dedicated article that that should be considered significant. This page: Notability (sports)/Association football is not really helpful. Gazozlu (talk) 23:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I located some additional coverage so in addition to:
 * The Hurhaber Article: Süper Lig oyuncusu Küçükçekmece Sinopspor'da| Silivri Hürhaber (silivrihurhaber.com)
 * The Fanatik Article: Bodrumspor, Murat Sarıgül'le yollarını ayırdı - TFF 1. Lig Haberleri - Spor (fanatik.com.tr)
 * There's also these:
 * Kent TV Article: Sarıgül ile Yollar Ayrıldı... - Bodrum'un Lider Haber Merkezi... (kenttv.net)
 * NTV Spor Article: Fatih Karagümrük'te sözleşmesi bitecek futbolcular | NTVSpor.net
 * 48 Spor Article: Bodrumspor'dan 4 futbolcuya veda | Haberler > FUTBOL (48spor.com)
 * Milliyet Article: Bodrumspor, Onur Akbay ve Murat Sarıgül'ü transfer etti (milliyet.com.tr)
 * Amatorlig.net Article: Murat Sarıgül Profesyonel sözleşmeye imza attı | Amatör Lig Net - Amatör Futbol - Süper Amatör Lig - Bölgesel Amatör Lig - Canlı Skor - Futbol Sahalarının Yıldızı (amatorlig.net)
 * and this Istanbul Amator Article: MURAT SARIGÜL BUCASPORDA - İSTANBUL AMATÖR (istanbulamator.com)
 * Gazozlu (talk) 17:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Those are all trivial transfer/signing reports pretty much directly from his clubs, nothing SIGCOV or non-ROUTINE. JoelleJay (talk) 03:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Transactional reports of any type are considered ROUTINE and don't count towards GNG. If all that can be said of an athlete in independent RS is a few sentences paraphrasing a transfer, the subject isn't notable. JoelleJay (talk) 03:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. I did go over the sources that Gazozlu found but in my opinion none of them can be considered significant. Alvaldi (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - the sources discussed throughout this AfD all lack depth, despite there being a reasonable number of them. All the passing mentions and squad list mentions in the world would not add up to a passing of GNG as it does not give us enough of a reason to have a stand-alone article in a general encyclopaedia. There doesn't seem to be any reasonable chance of a meaningful biography being built, since little coverage exists outside of routine transfer announcements and match reports/stats databases, which merely confirm the number of minutes of a match played by Sarıgül. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC, the two relevant criteria. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment:SPORTBASIC actually says the sources must be beyond "routine game coverage". This leaves out coverage of transfers which in this discussion has been referred to as routine coverage, but according to SPORTBASIC game coverage is routine and transfer coverage is beyond routine. There exists alot of routine game coverage, but the sources that I listed are not those. Also it appears that this subject does actually does pass WP:FOOTYN, the criteria that is listed on FOOTYN which this article meets is supported by reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazozlu (talk • contribs) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * FOOTYN has a note on it which states The player section of this notability guidance has been superseded by WP:Notability (sports), and is included below for information only as a record of the previous guidance that the Footy project came up with. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see that, however it is a positive indicator. If we look at SPORTBASIC it says:
 * Sports biographies must include at least one reference to a source providing significant coverage of the subject ✅ There is, the Hurhaber article.
 * Local sources must be independent of the subject, and must provide reports beyond routine game coverage. Listings of statistics must clearly satisfy the requirement for significant coverage. ✅ the further articles in Fanatik, NTV Spor, and Milliyet are reliable further sources that are not routine game coverage. This is an example of routine game coverage.
 * Furthermore these sources:
 * Are not trivial ✅, are not fansites ✅, are not primary sources ✅, are from reliable agencies ✅
 * Gazozlu (talk) 12:16, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Fanatik is indeed trivial as it mentions his release from Bodrumspor, with a very brief statement from the club and one more sentence saying that he played 3 games of football for them. NTV Spor is even worse as it's just a single trivial mention in a list of players whose contracts are expiring. Milliyet confirms that Bodrumspor have signed Sarıgül but contains absolutely no other information about him. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Trivial is if he is namedropped in an article that is largely not about him. There's enough articles that are, although some short, about him. Gazozlu (talk) 13:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * They key bit is in the first sentence of that section: A person is presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of significant coverage, that is, multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. (emph. added). Ljleppan (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * They key bit is in the first sentence of that section: A person is presumed to be notable if they have been the subject of significant coverage, that is, multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. (emph. added). Ljleppan (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSPORT.4meter4 (talk) 13:04, 1 October 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.