Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhys Archard


 * 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. To spend this much time discussing the minutiae of interpretation of a supplemental notability guideline (that is, one intended to make the determination of notability easier than the general notability guideline), seems quite silly. Notability (people) is not intended to be another hurdle that an article must pass to be considered notable. It is intended to be a shortcut to otherwise having to prove-out references according to WP:N. Since the guideline fails us in this case, as it makes it much harder, we must put it aside and get back to the general guideline. That would be the whole bit about the subject having been the subject of a substantial depth of coverage published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject, or non-trivial coverage of less substantial depth in multiple such sources. So all we needed to find was multiple independent reliable sources backing up reasonable assertions of importance or significance of the subject. As this discussion failed to yield same, and extraordinary efforts to make it fit WP:ATHLETE obviously failed, my decision is therefore to delete the article.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 00:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Rhys Archard

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

Pro footballer for a single-season; doesn't seem to meet notability requirements. I'm not an expert in aussie football by any means though, so I'm deferring this to AfD in case I'm missing something here. Shell babelfish 17:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 17:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions.   —Pixelface (talk) 17:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep played at the highest level of his sport (BIO). JJL (talk) 22:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- Canley (talk) 02:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep You might be missing the bit of WP:BIO about playing in a professional league (the Australian Football League). Association football players are often kept on AfD for playing one match for a professional team (likewise, they're often deleted if they've signed but not played a match). I think most Australians would agree that any AFL footballer who had played a whole season is notable enough for inclusion. Weak delete Shows how much I know about AFL (not much at all)! --Canley (talk) 03:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets BIO. Twenty Years 05:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. As far as I can tell, never played in any senior games per .  If there's better information than that then it should be added to the article as a reference.   Even if non-notable, we might keep a rookie's article if there was a likelihood that he was going to be promoted as it would be silly to remove his article prematurely.  Archard has apparently retired without that happening.   The article is a sub-stub and has zero chance of being expanded.  &mdash;Moondyne click! 06:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC) See below.
 * Delete From the references I've checked, he never made a league appearance in the AFL.  In 2007, he was a "rookie" squad member of AFL team Adelaide but did not play a league game.  The rest of his football career has been outside the highest level, in regional country football with Echuca, then in the SANFL. He hasn't actually played at the highest level of the sport, hence would appear to fail WP:BIO. In this regard, existing articles for fellow Adelaide "rookies" James Turner and Greg Gallman would also appear to be suspect. Murtoa (talk) 06:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well if he's played in the SANFL, he may be actually be notable.  We have lots of good articles on WAFL/SANFL (non-AFL) players.  Do you know for whom and when and if there's a reference?  &mdash;Moondyne click! 07:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC) He appears to have played for both North and South Adelaide in the SANFL, and got 1 vote in the 2007 Magarey Medal count.  He also got named in the Adelaide Advertiser's 2006 "SANFL team of the year".  He was 2006 Club Champion for SAFC..   Sorry to stuff you all around.  Article is now slightly expanded with some references.  I'm changing to Keep. &mdash;Moondyne click! 07:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think a distinction should be made between SANFL players pre and post 1990. Since the advent of SA-based clubs in the AFL (ie. post 1990) it can't be argued that a SANFL player has played at the highest level, and therefore meeting WP:BIO.  Before 1990 (and particularly thinking pre-1980 when it was rare for SA players to move interstate), for many SA players, playing in the SANFL was the highest level that they aspired to.  These days you could argue that being picked for the "SANFL team of the year" is merely confirmation that you've not been good enough to make the highest grade (ie. AFL) in that year. Murtoa (talk) 12:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps compare them with cricketers. State first-class cricketers are notable per WP:CRIN, a level below Test and ODI cricketers, the highest level of cricket.  The SANFL and WAFL competitions are a bit like the interstate Pura Cup and Ford Ranger tournaments, a level below AFL.  Sadly, the WP:AFL project has never gotten around to writing a notability guideline. &mdash;Moondyne click! 13:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, state cricketers play in the national competition, while SANFL, WAFL and VFL players only play in a state competition, unless you want to count playing in a State of Origin match, or they're picked up for the AFL. - Bilby (talk) 03:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - Fails the "playing at the highest" level test but has some significant articles (I've added two ) written primarily about him. Very borderline but I think, given that he seems to have given Footy away. There is unlikely to be enough to write a verifyable and neutral article. A good comparison is Paul Scoullar who played at the top of the SANFL, in numerous premiership teams, was far more significant to and successful in the sport than Archard...but is not written about enough to be notable - Peripitus (Talk) 00:21, 14 March 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.