Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Gibson (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. ✗ plicit  13:23, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Simon Gibson (footballer)

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

Deprodded, so here we are. WP:GNG fail - and WP:NSPORTS2022 guides us that significant coverage, not appearances, is the benchmark for whether a footballer is notable. As per that, Gibson is not. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:26, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United Kingdom. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:26, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. As usual, my objection is to overuse of prodding. WP:PROD lays out what prodding is for very clearly: Proposed deletion (PROD) is a way to suggest an article or file for uncontroversial deletion... PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected. It is certainly not for articles that until recently would have been considered to be notable. That is obviously not uncontroversial. It is also certainly not intended to circumvent AfD. Please only prod articles that no editor with any knowledge of procedure would consider to be notable. Anything else should go to AfD for full discussion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:59, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * OPPOSE As original creator of the article, I oppose its proposed deletion. He played 78 games in the Football League. There are hundreds if not thousands of articles on far less notable players. Heshs Umpire (talk) 13:38, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * As a content creator myself, I know that the deletion process can be frustrating. However, the fact that there are hundreds and possibly even thousands of articles "on far less notable players" is not a reason to keep. See WP:OSE. For this to be kept, we need to see examples of WP:SIGCOV discussing Gibson in reliable, independent sources. Cbl62 (talk) 19:43, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete we lack the sourcing to show a pass of GNG. That there are thousands of other articles that need to be deleted is no reason to keep this article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:30, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify - given the level he played at, I am confident there will be offline sources out there. The page should be draftified so it can be improved. GiantSnowman 18:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Have cleaned up and expanded the article, have left some ref idea links on the talk page. There are quite a few sources out there. He also seems to have played youth football for Scotland according to the link I left on the talk page. JPL's vote can be thrown out the window, it's meaningless as he doesn't care for the footy project. I don't know if you want to review the bit of work I done, if you're interested in changing your vote at all. Regards. Govvy (talk) 09:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * good work on this, but unfortunately I don't think it's enough to show GNG is met. GiantSnowman 06:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT #5. Of the sources in the article, one is a blog and thus not reliable, while the rest are passing mentions, with the longest being For the record, North End’s last game on grass was a 2-2 draw against Exeter with Simon Gibson being the last PNE player to score on grass at Deepdale. BilledMammal (talk) 15:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Where's the GNG coverage? Or even just the required piece of SIGCOV to meet SPORTCRIT? Or even independent coverage outside of stats? And Govvy's !vote can be thrown out the window, it's meaningless as it doesn't address the critical lack of GNG sourcing...:rolls eyes:. JoelleJay (talk) 21:04, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Willing to reconsider if actual WP:SIGCOV is brought forward from reliable, independent sources. Cbl62 (talk) 15:00, 27 June 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.