Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zach Varga


 * 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. This is quite a tricky close, yes initially a technical NFOOTY pass, but questionable GNG at best.

However, it seems that during the discussion consensus elsewhere regarding the level of professionalism in the main league in which the player played decided that it was not fully professional.

There's an argument that this should be closed as delete as it now seems like both an NFOOTY and GNG failure. However, given the change of consensus midway through this AfD, I wonder whether some editors' comments may have been presented differently had the original rationale been fails NFOOTY, fails GNG. It seems preseumptive of a closing admin to assume they would have not.

In this instance it seems better, given that this discussion, and others, will probably shape a wider consensus, for this discussion to be closed as no consensus, but without this precluding a renomination with an updated rationale. This seems especially relevent given the majority of the keep votes were meets NFOOTY-based rather than attempting to present sources showing GNG. Fenix down (talk) 15:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Zach Varga

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Played 5 WP:NFOOTY games in 2009 (per SW) or 17 games in 2008–2009 (per ) in the third-tier semi-professional, non-WP:FPL USL Second Division. Does not meet NFOOTY. Search results return no significant coverage to meet WP:GNG. Leviv&thinsp;ich 20:14, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Update: I have updated the nomination to reflect that this article no longer meets WP:NFOOTY because USL Second Division has been removed from WP:FPL per the note below. Leviv&thinsp;ich 17:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich  20:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich  20:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich  20:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich  20:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Leviv&thinsp;ich  20:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Leviv&thinsp;ich 20:31, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The article clearly passes the criteria of notability as stated in the Football/Fully professional leagues list. Shotgun pete 8:41, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. nom consulted me . Clearly fails GNG. After college tried his luck in the minor leagues - failed. There's no significant coverage here. NFOOTY merely creates a presumption of notability, but in the absence of sources it is not sufficient. This guy is from the internet age in an English speaking country - sources should be trivial to find online were he notable - they simply do not exist, and those asserting NFOOTY should pony up with a few in-depth reliable independent sources.
 * Keep – 17 appearances is clearly enough to pass WP:NFOOTY. 21.colinthompson (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * As this individuals admits that he was semi-professional - LinkedIn (same guy - same graduation year from Duquesne University) - working as "project specialist" in Fairmont Supply Company from May 2007 to October 2009 (following which he moved to Bombardier Transportation as a "Manufacturing control analyst") - a period completely overlapping with his stint with the Riverhounds (2008-9) - it is quite clear this is a semi-pro player, that the Riverhounds employed semi-pros, and that the league (given multiple other examples) - is not a WP:FPL (I will further note - that the policy status of WP:FPL - is merely that of an essay - e.g. zilch) - and besides not meeting GNG (the more important criteria) - this is a NFOOTY fail as well. Icewhiz (talk) 07:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - clearly passes WP:NFOOTBALL. Needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 07:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * - how does a semi-pro player, playing in a league with several other semi-pro players, pass NFOOTBALL? (which itself merely creates a presumption of GNG). NFOOTY states - "Players who have played, and managers who have managed in a competitive game between two teams from fully-professional leagues, will generally be regarded as notable." - as this player was employed by Fairmont Supply Company for the entirtity of his sting with the Riverhounds he was semi-pro, and any game he was involved with was not a game between two teams from "fully-professional leagues". Note that professional (receiving pay) does not mean fully-professional. Icewhiz (talk) 07:50, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * He played in a fully-pro league. A handful of semi-pro players doesn't affect that; same with a non-professional youth player playing in the Premier League, for example. GiantSnowman 07:51, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * A source backing that up? WP:FPL, which is a mere essay, cites USL itself (not a RS) which says - "USL SECOND DIVISION One level below the USL First Division lives in the USL Second Division, the foundation of professional soccer in the United States .... The league is the birthplace of professional players that aspire to reach the highest-levels of the game, while providing affordable family entertainment within their city" - which actually ("foundation of professional soccer" and "birthplace of professional players") doesn't even support "professional"   (though AFAICT USL D2 did pay a wage to everyone) - let alone "fully professional" (players don't work elsewhere). USL D2 was mainly a player development league - a large chunk of the rosters in the league were post-college players on rookie contracts who played for around a single season. Icewhiz (talk) 08:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: per consensus in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues (concurrent to this AfD) - USL Second Division was struck from the WP:FPL essay, as it was not fully-professional. This should affect !voting based on play in USL D2. Icewhiz (talk) 07:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 07:25, 14 April 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: How does it pass gng?
 * Keep passes WP:GNG Article is in need of development. Needs work - not afd WP:NOTCLEANUP  Lubbad85   (<b style="color:#060">☎</b>) 20:20, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NFOOTY (the keep !votes made on this basis need to be discounted as the league has been removed from the list at WP:FPL following a discussion). Number   5  7  08:52, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 18:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * delete Coverage of him doesn't meet the GNG and playing in the USL Second Division does not meet WP:NFOOTY. Sandals1 (talk) 18:32, 22 April 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.