Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikolai Lõsanov


 * 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. Meistriliiga is not fully pro. And there is just barely consensus that his UEFA participation is inadequate. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 19:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Nikolai Lõsanov

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG, and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested on the grounds that he has played in the first round of the Intertoto Cup and the first qualifying round of the Europa League neither of which confer notability in my opinion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, this player may not have played in a fully professional league but he has played in a UEFA Competition 3 time. They may all be defeats and, yes, one was 10 years ago but that must be notable for something. I have also added/provided infomation about his UEFA Competition Games. I might make some of the infomation into a table like the shots. Don't you think?
 *  Strong Keep

Also, I know it isn't that significant. I'm positive there's more infomation on his life-We can expand this page. There are also may other people who have not played in a fully Professianal League. I do agree to get rid of some. Recently I've been trying to expand this page as you probably can, and hopefully, can see. I will expand this page as much as I can.

Thanks, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Wait, wait, why does everyone keep saying that he hasn't played in a professional league ? He is playing for club that plays in the Meistriliiga, which is the top league in Estonia and definitely a professional league - I mean, winners and top finishers go to Champions League and UEFA Europe League. --Ezhuks (talk) 19:46, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * See WP:FPL. The Meistriliiga is not fully professional. The teams that are typically at the lower end of the table have a fair number of part-time players playing for them. As for the international competitions, UEFA does not require its feeder leagues to be professional. Even the teams competing in UEFA competitions are permitted a fair degree of amateurism. For example, the Maltese league which is largely amateur qualifies two teams to the Champions League and Europa League, which is precisely why the early rounds of the these competitions cannot be regarded as fully pro, and are therefore insufficient to establish notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Right, I see. Still, the fellow passes WikiProject Football/Notability, if his club, JK Narva Trans, is professional ( I couldn't find anything that supported this claim, neither anything that contradicts it ). --Ezhuks (talk) 20:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * As reasonable as the assumption that Trans is pro team may be, it is an assumption nonetheless and therefore an invalid claim for notability since notability requires verifiable evidence. Also, WP:FOOTYN is an essay not a guideline and a somewhat archaic one at that as far the section on players is concerned. Last year, the notability guidelines for all athletes were revised to form WP:NSPORT making it the definitive document on footballing notability, and it requires not only the club, but the league to be fully professional. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:06, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * STRONG, STRONG KEEP

Hi,

Hold on, Hold on you are completely wring about Trans, his current club, being towards the bottom half. They finished the 2010 Meistriliiga in 3rd position-Qualifying for the 2011–12 UEFA Europa League First qualifying round. Some of his other clubs may be towards the bottom but he's not at those clubs now. He's playing for a club that has finished 3rd in the Estonian League. Yes, it's not fully professional but why are there still players who have never played in a fully professional league on Wikipedia. That will be stupid if there all deleted. This is a good league. YES, I KNOW it's not fully professional!

Thanks, pbl1998--Pbl1998 (talk) 20:26, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * First, please do not !vote more than once. Second, the fact that there are other articles on footballers who have not played in fully pro leagues is an invalid claim to notability. Those articles either pass WP:GNG, or should be deleted. Third, I never claimed that Trans is at the bottom of Meistriliiga, nor is their position in the table relevant. It is the profossionality status of the entire competition that is relevant here. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:06, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - the two relevant guidelines are WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL, and this chap fails both of them. Ergo, he isn't notable - sorry guys. GiantSnowman 23:20, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:ATH and WP:GNG Spiderone  13:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep plays in a notable top-level European League and has played in notable UEFA competitions, including Europe League. Eldumpo (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, Eldumpo, we've been through this before. And I don't just mean the community, but you and I personally. It is a well established consensus that the early rounds of UEFA club competitions do not confer notability. I apologize if I come across as a little rude, but to argue that they do is not only futile, but dilatory. Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I object to my comment being labelled as dilatory; just because my view is different to yours it does not mean my purpose in posting is solely to be difficult and obstruct matters. It is my personal opinion and I don't believe the counter-argument is cast-iron. Yes, there are a number of people at AfD who state that qualifying rounds are not regarded as notable (I'm not sure how that ties in with what sources are saying though) but there are others who agree that European competition is a notable level. Eldumpo (talk) 17:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You are of course entitled to your opinion, and I have no objection to you disagreeing with me. Where I object is you making this argument when you know full well that every time you've made it you've failed. I never intended to imply that it was your intent to be dilatory, but there comes a point when you have to admit that slowing down the afd process is all that your argument is going achieve. The counter-argument, as you say, is not iron-cast, but if we are going to break with consensus we are going to need a good reason, which you have not provided. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Your original comment to me stated "...to argue that they [the early rounds of UEFA club competitions confer notability] do is ...dilatory" so I'm not sure why you then claim that you did not mean to imply my reply was dilatory. Anyway, I haven't kept records but believe that sometimes the view has been at AfD that the early rounds can denote notability. Other than talk of consensus you haven't indicated why you believe the early rounds of UEFA competitions don't confer notability - have you any sources to show this? I'm not sure what the comment about slowing up the AfD process means. I posted my view on the AfD as I am entitled to do and you posted a comment, which you didn't have to do, but which you are also entitled to make. In any case, what is the desire to rush through the AfD process. Eldumpo (talk) 10:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * While I obviously don't have a complete record either, but every time you objected to the deletion of an article I nominated with the argument that the early rounds of UEFA competitions did confer notability, the article was deleted, which to me indicates that there is a fairly strong consensus that these rounds do not confer notability. In the vast majority of cases, these rounds generate nothing more than trivial coverage in the form of database entries and match reports. WP:NSPORT explicitly states that database entries can be used as sources but are insufficient to establish notability, and match reports usually have only passing mentions of any one player involved in the match. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 02:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This guy sounds like he could be notable, and I would be tempted to support keeping this if someone could find some decent independent sources. So far we just have stats pages, and I couldn't find anything online. Without them, he fails WP:ATH and WP:GNG. Alzarian16 (talk) 23:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete per WP:ATH, WP:BIO, WP:GNG, etc. Qworty (talk) 04:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- -- Cirt (talk) 22:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - UEFA Competitions. Would be disgraceful if his articles info would get lost. Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * As I stated above, he has only played in the qualifying rounds of UEFA competitions which are not fully pro and only generate trivial coverage (databases, match reports) making them insufficient to grant notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:04, 1 February 2011 (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.