Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanley Page


 * 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 no consensus. I suspect a number of participants in the debate will be unhappy about this result, but essentially the community is completely divided on things like WP:FOOTYN and a long-term solution would be to start an RfC to revise the notability guidelines. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Stanley Page

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. With only one match, a cup match, to his name, it's an assumption there won't be coverage in 1930s newspapers either. Geschichte (talk) 09:44, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:45, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: passes WP:FOOTYN played in a competitive match between two professional teams.--Add92 (talk) 12:47, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:FOOTYN is superceded by WP:GNG. Geschichte (talk) 18:31, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep this 1930s player meets WP:NATH. This means that notability is assumed, and it isn't necessary to waste everyone's time with various comments about not meeting GNG - which only introduces WP:BIAS, given to the poor extent of the Internet 90 years ago. Nfitz (talk) 19:50, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Quite the contrary. Internet or not, a player who never played a game of football in any league can not be "assumed" to be the subject of a written piece by anyone at any time in human history. PS. I promise this is my last comment in this discussion per WP:BLUDGEON. Geschichte (talk) 11:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 10:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - comprehensively fails GNG, far more important than one appearance in a minor cup. GiantSnowman 10:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:NFOOTY. We can't just "assume" that he fails WP:GNG because he only played in one game. Have you actually tried to search newspapers of the era? Have you done a comprehensive search, keeping in mind many of them are not available online? Or are you just making an "assumption" that none exist? Smartyllama (talk) 19:22, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I am with GS on this, I don't see how WP:GNG is passed. Probably a tough one to look for sources. Govvy (talk) 12:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per GS and Govvy. NFOOTY is a presumption, not an assumption, and that presumption is very weak when a player only meets NFOOTY by playing for a short time (like one game). I don't think it's up to !voters to prove that GNG is absent; I think it's up to !voters to show that GNG is met. Absent that showing–and absent any potential-GNG sources that we know of so far–it doesn't meet WP:SPORTBASIC and should be deleted. We can't write an article based on a presumption; and stat-permastubs are of no encyclopedic value. Also, it's just bloody obvious that a player who played in one pro game isn't very, very unlikely to be notable. – Levivich 22:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT. WP:ATHLETE says “... the subjects of standalone articles should meet the General Notability Guideline.”; now all of us have searched for significant coverage of Stanley Page and found none so it’s safe to presume that there is none. For my part, as well as the usual google searches, I searched the British Newspaper Archive and could not find any significant coverage of the man. According to a report in the Nottingham Journal, it was a weakened Mansfield Town side that took part in the match against Chesterfield, which perhaps goes some way towards explaining the 8-1 scoreline, Page’s involvement and his disappearance from the football records thereafter. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:42, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep passes NFOOTY. I reject the assumption that no sourcing exists. Lepricavark (talk) 13:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete I have looked through the Gale Primary Sources website and put his name between 1933-1938 to see if I get any results. The result was 30 stories about a Stanley Page. How many of those were about the football player, Stanley Page? Zero as there are mentions of an Stanley Page playing bowls in Dover but not football as most of the other references had Stanley and Page seperate. So the player fails WP:GNG. HawkAussie (talk) 03:43, 9 December 2019 (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.