Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thein Naing Oo


 * 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. Fenix down (talk) 08:36, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Thein Naing Oo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

He hasn't played in a WP:FPL based league which would make him fail WP:NFOOTY. HawkAussie (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. HawkAussie (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. HawkAussie (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Myanmar-related deletion discussions. HawkAussie (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 08:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - No WP:BEFORE? NFOOTY passed, Myanmar's National League is listed at WP:FPL. GSA show he played in AFC Cup between two FPL clubs a few times, which Soccerway backs up, as well as Myanmar's cup competition so likely featured in the MNL too - very difficult to find online media for Burmese sources. Career still ongoing, the MNL list him; though not with current team Sagaing United, as shown by GSA. R96Skinner (talk) 09:02, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The thing is, we don't know how many games if any he has played in the MNL that is why I put it up to ask the question. HawkAussie (talk) 00:08, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, I entirely get that and it's a fair/important question - but wouldn't a talk page discussion have been more appropriate; at least at first? Given he has played in the AFC Cup, Asia's Europa League equivalent, and the Charity Cup final, equiv. Community Shield, I'd say it's fair to assume he's played in the MNL numerous times; esp. as he's played for four clubs in five years. Added to the fact of the rather sizeable language barrier. R96Skinner (talk) 09:08, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete This isn't a biography and shouldn't be kept unless sufficient sources with which to write an article are discovered, per WP:WHYN. Pontificalibus 12:08, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * it is common to give an exception to ongoing careers, per consensus within NFOOTY. R96Skinner (talk) 18:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That sounds like crystalballery in violation of WP:N and WP:V. We certainly don't keep any non-sporting biographies of non-retired living people simply because there's a chance the subject might become sufficiently notable later in their career.Pontificalibus 15:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps so, but that doesn't stop the fact the exception rule exists - and going against it would be pretty disruptive, if you ask me. R96Skinner (talk) 15:54, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Where does it exist as a rule? I am aware that the notability criteria for biographies developed within certain sporting wikiprojects are deficient in that they conflict with broader WP:NSPORT (per WP:SPORTBASIC) or WP:N guidelines. My reading is that consensus in Wikipedia as a whole favours WP:GNG per WP:WHYN over any sport-specific criteria (which really should have been developed to identify only those subjects likely to satisfy GNG).Pontificalibus 16:02, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * AfD/Mats van Kins, AfD/Sean Karani and AfD/Danish Irfan Azman, to name just three, show an NFOOTY pass with ongoing career is to be kept. I'm not saying it's something that is right/wrong per Wikipedia guidelines, just the fact it exists. R96Skinner (talk) 16:16, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Those three AfD's don't represent a consensus which must be adhered to in future AfDs. In fact they seem to suffer from WP:JUSTAPOLICY, with people ignoring the fact that NFOOTY guidelines are to be "used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) is likely to meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article" as stated in WP:NSPORT, and not simply an end in themselves.Pontificalibus 06:15, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * "to name just three", check the archives for more. Again, I'm not stating it's correct or incorrect but it is consensus - and an AfD isn't an appropriate to discuss your, even if valid, qualms with consensus and/or guidelines, as noted at AfD/Atantaake Tooma. R96Skinner (talk) 12:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Consenus is achieved and maintained/changed by making policy-based arguments like those I set out here, not by pointing at previous deficient AfDs where discussion of the relevant policy is lacking.—--Pontificalibus 13:06, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The AfDs go like that because of the consensus, that's kinda how it works; or at least should. I can see you are coming from the right direction, but you evidently don't have an understanding of the current state of NFOOTY. Which is fine, but you should learn about it - as I would if I was going to participate in anything to do with WP:NACTOR, WP:NACADEMICS or WP:NMUSIC. R96Skinner (talk) 13:17, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * NFOOTY is subservient to NSPORT, and shouldn’t be viewed in isolation as already explained above. These arguments need broad input and shouldn’t rely on people only familiar with particular areas.--Pontificalibus 13:25, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * For the third time, I'm not saying it's right/wrong - just that the exception exists, and going against it is disruptive as it leads to inconsistency. An individual AfD isn't the appropriate place to discuss this, also already mentioned. I can see we're going round in circles, happy editing! R96Skinner (talk) 15:21, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, with a reminder that those assessing consensus can only apply policy as written. Unwritten rules and undocumented consensus, especially when arrived at within the confines of a single project without being subject to community scrutiny cannot be generally applied.
 * Neutral He passes WP:NFOOTY, but the article itself does not pass WP:GNG. In favour of improving it, but mostly just commenting as if this is deleted there shouldn't be any prejudice against recreating it. SportingFlyer  T · C  21:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete – fails GNG. "No sources, no article". I'm not finding anything beyond a routine transfer report (from the Ministry of Information, sounds friendly) and brief mentions  . There is nothing out there from which we can write an article. – Levivich  02:53, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * As you know, NFOOTY pass with ongoing career is more than enough to be kept - as shown at AfD/Mats van Kins, AfD/Sean Karani and AfD/Danish Irfan Azman. You even alluded to it at AfD/Dobrica Tegeltija - at least try and be consistent. R96Skinner (talk) 15:58, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I didn't so much "allude" to it as explicitly say The "young and playing" exception–which I disagree with and think is contrary to policy ... Seems pretty consistent to me. If I renominated those three articles you listed, and they all got deleted, would that change your mind about anything? – Levivich 17:05, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You're going against consensus which is disruptive, and leads to inconsistency. As mentioned numerous times, it's cool that you disagree with it but an AfD isn't the appropriate place to change it. R96Skinner (talk) 17:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
 * OK let me ask a different question: if you were the only person !voting "keep" in an AfD, would you call that "going against consensus which is disruptive"? (I would not.) – Levivich 02:59, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It depends on the context and rationale, obviously. If I was constantly going against the 1app/vanished consensus which favours deletion, e.g. AfD/Cristian Gorgerino, - you'd be questioning me, and rightly so. This discussion between us has run its course, I'm sure we will discuss things further on a future AfD. R96Skinner (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep passes WP:NFOOTY  is currently  playing for a WP:FPL team in Myanmar where Football is the most popular sport  and also as per WP:NEXIST as coverage in Burmese and Shan language is not available .SNGs including WP:FOOTY exist to provide for the inclusion of certain defined subjects that cannot immediately be shown to pass GNG. An SNG provides for a presumption of notability, not a presumption of non-notability An SNG cannot be used to exclude/delete an article when the subject passes GNG, but the reverse is patently absurd because that would negate the entire reason for the existence of SNGs particularly for a player currently playing and only 24 years old.Subject has played at the 2016 AFC Cup as per this for Ayeyawady FC against Bengaluru FC.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:00, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Nomination is erroneous, as easily meets WP:N. We wouldn't be having this discussion in any English-speaking nation where football is the number one sport. Ergo to delete this article is a clear example of WP:BIAS. Nfitz (talk) 17:01, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Although it appears this article passes NFOOTBALL due to a handful of 2016 AFC Cup matches against clubs from fully-pro leagues, I struggle to justify an article about a person who has such insignificant online coverage (since I don't know how to evaluate potentially extant offline sources in Myanmar). Basically, we have this which tells us his name and birthdate, plus a few databases (including the reliable Soccerway which cannot even determine if he has played in the local league for his club). With so little to go by, I don't think we can write enough for an article or be comfortable that the information is accurate. Jogurney (talk) 21:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:NFOOTBALL as represented Myanmar at the 2015 Southeast Asian Games. 103.200.134.149 (talk) 14:24, 5 September 2019 (UTC)  CU blocked. – Levivich  05:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 21:42, 6 September 2019 (UTC) August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment – Statistics websites, game reports, and transfer reports are all primary sources. Is there even one secondary source upon which we can base this article? Without it, I don't see how this article can be kept and yet comply with core policy WP:NOR: Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources. Here, we seem to be basing an article entirely on primary sources. – Levivich 15:11, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Hannakofasti (talk) 16:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Doesn't fail NFOOTY, as discussed above. R96Skinner (talk) 16:41, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject fails WP:GNG. Article fails WP:V and WP:BLP. BLP and V are policy and trump any guidelines. Absent reliable sources to back up the claims of fact made in this article it cannot be kept, period. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:13, 15 September 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.