Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadeem Omar (footballer)


 * 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 __EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. After examination of the paywalled sources was presented, consensus seems to have changed to deletion. Aoidh (talk) 05:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Nadeem Omar (footballer)

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

Since WP:NFOOTY is no longer a valid SNG, GNG must be met. This doesn't come close. Was draftified for improvement, but returned without any improvement.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. Alvaldi (talk) 17:56, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - I found, , , , , , , and , among many many more Swedish and Arabic sources. Young player with ongoing career who is already youth international. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources above which show notability, although the HN sources are paywalled. GiantSnowman 19:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, per significant coverage above.--Ortizesp (talk) 06:27, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment. The first source listed is an interview with some independent commentary, the fourth is obviously non-independent club promo, the fifth source is pure Q&A interview/routine transaction coverage, and every other source is paywalled. Even if the first source was considered SIGCOV (I do not think it is), unless editors have access to the paywalled Swedish newspapers I do not see how anyone can claim GNG is met. If we don't know what's in those sources we can't evaluate how significant they are. JoelleJay (talk) 19:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: BLP Fails GNG and BIO. Sources in the article do not show N. BEFORE didn't show anything that is IS RS with SIGCOV showing N, database, primary, promo, stats, etc. Source evail:
 * Interview, not IS RS :: https://kirkuknow.com/ar/news/64036
 * Part promo, part interview, not IS RS (free trial to read article) :: https://www.hn.se/sport/fff/fr%C3%A5n-reserv-till-superettankval-som-f%C3%B6rstaval-njuter-av-varje-sekund-1.84334383
 * ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: https://www.hn.se/sport/fff/nadeem-omar-kastas-rakt-in-i-hetluften-efter-tim-erlandssons-skada-1.82811884
 * Interview, not IS RS :: https://falkenbergsff.se/nadeem-omar-till-iraks-u19-landslag/
 * ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: https://www.falkenbergsnyheter.se/ettan-sodra-falkenbergs-ff-fotboll/nadeem-omar-lamnar-falkenbergs-ff/118399
 * ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: https://www.hn.se/sport/fff/nadeem-omar-om-stormatchen-mot-gais-1.83341888
 * ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: https://www.hn.se/sport/fff/erlandsson-magnetr%C3%B6ntgad-nadeem-omar-f%C3%A5r-chansen-1.82737678
 * ROUTINE, not SIGCOV :: https://www.hallandsposten.se/sport/fotboll/is-halmia-f%C3%B6rst%C3%A4rker-med-landslagsm%C3%A5lvakt-1.94773565
 * WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"'; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy (WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines (WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV).  // Timothy :: talk  01:04, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The sources go into his background quite a bit, and the coverage is not routine. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 08:42, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus (and had closed it as such), but a valid question was raised about something I missed so relisting to get it back on the logs. It doesn't necessarily need to run another seven days. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  00:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, now that it's apparent the paywalled sources are routine. JoelleJay (talk) 04:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I heavily doubt the user above actually had access to the paywalled sources... Even if he did, the second source is definitely not routine and the first source definitely is reliable and those are just the first two sources... Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 13:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have access to the paywalled sources? JoelleJay (talk) 01:11, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * A user tossing around the word "routine" without any explanation as to why isn't really proof of that. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete - Article about footballer who has never played at a level higher than the Swedish third division, and which appears to fail WP:GNG. I could not locate any significant coverage online other than what is linked above. The links above that I can access are routine/trivial, and the Hallands Nyheter/Hallandsposten newspaper articles that are paywalled may or may not be. The headlines don't suggest that they are in-depth, as they look like a club signing announcement and a note about another player's injury that leads to Omar's promotion to the club's first team. This is nowhere near what is required to meet the GNG. Jogurney (talk) 12:42, 14 April 2023 (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.