Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Cairney


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 02:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Paul Cairney

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

Footballer who has never played in a fully professional league, thus failing WP:ATHLETE. Deprodded on the basis of a google news seach which overlooked the fact that many of the 70 hits were not actually about the football player. The true figure of hits was less than half that number,, all but one of which only mentioned him as a goalscorer or as a byline about a trial. пﮟოьεԻ  5  7  18:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  18:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Google news search produces thousands of items about nn footballs mentioning their names in match reports. User:Nfitz doesn't seem to grasp the concept, despite the numerous AfDs, that articles and news items actually have to be about the person in question, not just a name check. Cairney fails notability at WP:ATHLETE as he has not played in a fully-professional league or competition. --Jimbo[online] 19:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, as he has only played for an amateur club. The article can be recreated if he plays for his parent club Partick Thistle, who are a professional club. He is on loan to Queen's Park until January, therefore there is little risk of him meeting the WP:ATHLETE guideline very soon. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.   -- Undead Warrior (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails all relevant policy guidelines. - fchd (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly meets WP:BIO. That he doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE is not relevant. He is the sole subject of the BBC article, and is also in about half the articles that come up (yes, I was well aware that only about 30 to 40 of the articles related to him - but there was no further length to make any comment in the edit summary. It seemed to me that 30-40 articles were more than enough, but the goalposts seem to move on this. Actually, if you do a proper search the number of articles is 43 - . Those claiming that it isn't enough aren't happy when there is a dozen serious international articles, and hundreds of more minor sources. Nfitz (talk) 01:34, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * He is not the "sole subject of... about half the articles that come up" here. He is the sole subject of two of those articles at most. The remaining 68 either mention him during a match report, or are about other Paul Cairneys. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  17:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, correct. What I wrote was somewhat ambiguous. Either way, clearly meets WP:BIO. Nfitz (talk) 00:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It meets WP:BIO in no way at all. He has hardly any coverage on the web and when he is mentioned, it's only a passing mention. Undead Warrior (talk) 08:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ATHLETE, WP:FOOTYN, WP:N and good sense. --Angelo (talk) 09:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. One article does not make you encyclopaedia famous, give me a break. GauchoDude (talk) 21:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 16 September 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.