Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamás Romhányi (2nd nomination)


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 13:52, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Tamás Romhányi
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previous afd failed to reach a consensus. The fact remains, his only claim to notability was a single one-minute-long appearance in the Hungarian top flight four and half years ago which does not appear to have generated much in terms of significant coverage. In my opinion, this pretty clearly falls under the part of WP:NSPORT which says that not all articles meeting the criteria must be kept, given that he only just passes the guideline and fails WP:GNG quite clearly. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - comprehensively fails WP:GNG, which outweighs him barely passing WP:NFOOTBALL. Non-notable. GiantSnowman 09:20, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - still fails WP:GNG despite barely passing WP:NFOOTBALL. Mentoz86 (talk) 21:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Article does not meet GNG, which is more important than him technically meeting NFOOTBALL. Eldumpo (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as above, GNG outweighs project-specific notability criteria, and he fails GNG. C 679 20:53, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: Although normally there would be a clear consensus in this discussion, this AfD was not properly transcluded in the daily log. I have accordingly procedurally relisted it to allow for additional discussion to occur.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 17:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Seems to have a lack of outside sources. Ducknish (talk) 20:16, 13 March 2013 (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.