Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomasz Kupisz


 * 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 as he fails WP:ATHLETE. пﮟოьεԻ  5  7  23:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Tomasz Kupisz

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

Player fails notability at WP:ATHLETE having never played in a fully-professional league/competition Hubschrauber729 (talk) 00:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete unneeded article about another youth footballer, clearly fails WP:ATHLETE and WP:FOOTYN --Angelo (talk) 00:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.   --  TravellingCari  02:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.   --  TravellingCari  02:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep currently training with first team as per . Season begins in 5 days. Pure insanity to start deleting articles of first team player 5 days before start of season. If necessary relist in a fortnight if they aren't part of first team. Nfitz (talk) 06:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment "season begins in 5 days", and so? Competitive football matches are played every week once the season starts, so I don't really understand your point. In addition, we're talking of a 18-year old youngster who is signed with his current team since February 2007, and with very little chances of playing immediately at the season start (he has never played before, in the end). --Angelo (talk) 07:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * .......plus the Premier League season doesn't start in 5 days anyway, it starts in 11 days -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct - I was thinking Championship. I can never get my mind around Wigan being in the Premiership ... however point stands, there seems little point in deleting articles for first team players 11 days before the season starts. Nfitz (talk) 08:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom; fails WP:ATHLETE. Can recreate when/if he become notable. GiantSnowman 10:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 10:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, player fails notability at WP:ATHLETE. Recreate if and when he plays in a fully pro league/competition. Keeping an article on the basis that he might play in a couple of days time is crystal ballery.--Jimbo[online] 12:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. You should read WP:CRYSTAL. Keeping an article on the basis that he's going to play in the next few weeks ISN'T crystal ballery. A few months or years yes. The example there list events that we know will happen 2 years from now not being WP:CRYSTAL! Nfitz (talk) 17:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment so, you're sure this guy's actually going to play in two weeks. Just out of curiosity, do you have a crystal ball or, maybe, you just talked with Steve Bruce about his presence in the lineup? I think these are the two only ways to be somewhat sure of this bold claim. --Angelo (talk) 08:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep doesn't policy say he'll be keepable after he plays 1 minutes in a match? Seems silly to exclude him now, regardless we have a non-trivial source. Drunken Pirate (talk) 21:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't read Polish. Does it say that he has made an appearance for a senior team in a professional league? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 21:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Obviously it doesn't say that. So can no athlete ever have an article that hasn't "made an appearance for a senior team in a professional league?"  Did Kobe Bryant not have an article until he played his first pro game?  Seems like we're being a little too hung up on WP:ATHLETE that will be filled in a few days.  I don't know what we gain by having this deleted and recreated in two weeks. Drunken Pirate (talk) 22:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No, plenty of footballers are kept because they pass WP:BIO. --Jimbo[online] 12:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What about a boxer who won National Championship but never took part in any fight in ring just because the opponents were surrendered by walkover? greg park avenue (talk) 14:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - all current players of Wigan Atheletic are listed in Wikipedia, see no 31 Maynor Figueroa, why Kupisz with No 28 should be an exception? Soccer is a team sport or what? greg park avenue (talk) 21:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Figueroa has played at professional level and represented his country and therefore clearly passes WP:ATHLETE. Kupisz has done neither.  I fail to see what you are driving at with your comparison. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Kupisz also represented his country, but obviously some countries are more equal than others. And if you classify notability of an athlete on the basis how much money he makes, I think you're in the wrong category of sports. I recommend switching to tennis or golf. greg park avenue (talk) 05:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's held across the board that U-19 appearances (or U-23, or anything but senior team) don't count for notability. That doesn't matter if it's England, if it's the US, or if it's Poland or anywhere else.  If Kupisz had made an appearance for the senior national squad in a competitive (i.e., not a friendly) match, we would consider him to be notable.  If you have some proof that he has, please share, since no one here is interested in wrongly deleting players. Vickser (talk) 05:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about greg? If you read WP:ATHLETE and WikiProject Football/Notability, you will realize that youth appearances do not count toward notability. What is the point of keeping this article? He does not have a professional game under his belt, which cleary proves that fails WP:ATHLETE. Why keep it? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Why exclude him from this list? All players 1 to 29 are here, what's wrong with number 28? greg park avenue (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Without having actually double checked that this is true for each player, it's presumably because they have all made senior team appearances in a fully professional league and thus pass WP:Athlete. If that's not true for any of the players on the list, those players should also likely be deleted. If and when Kupisz makes an appearance, he too can get an article. Vickser (talk) 05:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Wrong interpretation of Wikipedia guidelines. Even in WP:MUSIC a member of a notable band is generally considered notable or vice versa - if one member of the band became notable somewhere else, the band is considered notable. Same thing in World Cup in Soccer - if a national team wins the championship, each member of the team (all 22 atheletes) gets the medal, even those who didn't appear in any game. They are just part of the team, and that's what this sport is about. greg park avenue (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, according to WP:Music, "members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band," so that's a bad example. Regardless, for WP:Athlete, you need to have actually played in a competitive match for the team, just being signed and having a number isn't enough. Our policy is that way across all sports.  Vickser (talk) 20:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. He doesn't pass WP:Athlete, and I can't find any evidence (nor do I see any evidence presented here) that suggests he otherwise passes WP:BIO.  If at some point in the future he does meet one of those, I won't oppose recreation.  Vickser (talk)`
 * Delete I agree with Vickser.  Gtstricky Talk or C 16:50, 8 August 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.