Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trivela (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   keep. At present, the calls to keep are unanimous with the exception of the nominator, so there is not a consensus for deletion. That leaves me considering whether the article is in violation of core policies, and have registered that Smilerpt has found a source which is not really encyclopedia material (more a how-to guide), but a look at indicates that the website this was published on has some fact-checking and reviewing before publishing things, and might be reliable enough, and the link does alleviate the worst of the WP:V concerns as well as the issues with the article being unsourced. If nothing else, it is evidence that the term is real and not made-up or original research. I am calling this a keep for now. Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Trivela

 * - (|View AfD) (View log)

Where are the credible third person sources in English or Portuguese to prove notability and Google hits don't count! Dwanyewest (talk) 21:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. As I said when I removed the prod tag there are loads of hits for 'Trivela+Quaresma' at Google News. My Portuguese is very rudimentary but I can see that many of these are about this subject, including some in French and German which I am better able to understand. I'm not quite sure why these sources "don't count". There is no requirement for sources to be in English. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

My concern is not whether they are sources are in English or not its whether the sources to support the information is credible and notable observe its not that hard to grasp WP:RS,WP:N.Dwanyewest (talk) 22:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Unless there is credible third person sources to support statements. Otherwise delete Dwanyewest (talk) 23:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: My impulse is to keep pending sources, but I don't have any sources to offer. It's a real technique, but notable? I'm inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt. I'll see if I can track down a source or two that would qualify as independent and reliable. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 02:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep: It's a real and sometimes amazing technique as we can see in these two Roberto Carlos goals: against France and against Tenerife, , the last one called the "impossible goal". I speak Portuguese and I also couldn't find any non visual sources.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caiaffa (talk • contribs) 05:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Keeper   |   76   |   Disclaimer  17:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep: I am Portuguese, and I can comment on this soccer techique. Visual evidences can be found at google related to the Footballer Ricardo Quaresma, some of the links: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNoFJTOEUPg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilerpt (talk • contribs) 00:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is another source but non-visual: http://www.howtodothings.com/sports-recreation/how-to-execute-the-trivela —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilerpt (talk • contribs) 00:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I swear its like communicating with retards sometimes the article must have reliable sources and a cert notability read the guidelines. WP:RS,WP:N. Dwanyewest (talk) 01:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

"retards" - I am freely trying to contribute. If my comment are not accurate that's ok, but you don't need to call the users retards! I don't really think that's the practice or either the spirit of wikipedia, is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.22.156.183 (talk) 11:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Still about the retards, I think you should read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.22.156.183 (talk) 11:35, 19 May 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.