Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Daly

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. Nja²⁴⁷ 10:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Ian Daly

Ian Daly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Deleted with A7 and recreated some days after. Magioladitis (talk) 00:55, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• STRONG KEEP - This is a relevant article providing valuable added information to Wikipedia. Please stop the overzealous policing and deletion of Wikipedia articles. Furthermore, this meets each of Wikipedia's Five Pillars which explicitly states they are the only five rules, rendering all other arguments irrelevant.Aliveatoms (talk) 00:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. Aliveatoms (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) made the identical recommendation on six AfDs in quick succession. —C.Fred (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• Keep. Verified against the Aris website;[1] Daly is on the roster. Full professional on the main roster of a top-level professional team meets WP:ATHLETE. Expansion seems to be the appropriate course. —C.Fred (talk) 01:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Subject has played at a professional level, and thus meets notability guidelines for athletes. Edward321 (talk) 03:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 13:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - while he does exist and does play for Aris, he doesn't appear to have played in a first-team ganme. Therefore he fails WP:ATHLETE, as you have to make a first-team appearance in a fully-pro league in order to be notable. GiantSnowman 13:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - He has played for the Irish Under 19 National Team FYI, the only reason why he hasnt made a fist team appearance this season is because the league has not started yet!, i say we wait until the new league season begins in Greece (August 22) and wait until Round 5 at least to see if he make an appearance, if he doesnt, fair enough delete the article. Alexandros (talk) 13:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• Youth caps ar international level do not confer notability, and saying "he will play" is a pure case of crystallballery. GiantSnowman 13:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Says who?--Vintagekits (talk) 15:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Delete being on a roster/squad doesn't fulfill any criteria, he has to have actually played for the club. Youth caps do not confer notability. Also there are no third-party sources that meet WP:N/WP:V at the moment. Recreate if/when he ever makes his debut. --Jimbo^[online] 15:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment, within ten second V and N issues address and sorted.--Vintagekits (talk) 15:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment I'd say the only two independent are the Goal.com and RTE, however they're not in detail as per WP:GNG. --Jimbo^[online] 20:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Keep, per WP:N and WP:BIO which trumps the flawed WP:ATHLETE.--Vintagekits (talk) 14:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, recreate when he actually plays a senior match for somebody. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. Full professional on the main roster of a top-level professional team meets WP:ATHLETE. If he continues to play reserve football, he might as well be deleted, but this is unseemly haste. Jhealy (talk) 15:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Actually WP:ATHLETE doesn't mention top-level, but fully-professional and says he must have competed, rather than just be on a roster. --Jimbo^[online] 16:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Actually all the players on the Ireland U-19 team are professional therefore he passes WP:ATHLETE - "competed at the fully professional level of a sport" - bingo bango!--Vintagekits (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Most of them are on YTS contracts and the opposition they play probably aren't either. --Jimbo^[online] 23:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
        • Strong Keep They wouldn't be on Youth contracts at that age group-under-19s would be on professional terms-do you follow football at all? If it was U-17s or younger I'd agree there is a chance, but this guy is clearly a professional player on the books of a professional club in a fully-professional league. he's yet to make an apperance because he only signed last month (June) of this year, deleting this outright is crazy-I agree this needs more time. Are Wikipedia struggling for hosting space and running the risk of going down or something? Is that why there is pressure on to delete articles at the moment? Otherwise, this over-zealous approach will just start to anger people and I don't quite understand the rationale, if people feel theres just cause for an article being there and are willing to argue the points while recreating the page continously, why would you keep deleting it? Joseph McSweeney 14:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
        • Anyway youth football isn't by no means notable as it's not the highest possible level they can represent their country at, thousands of players play youth football and never make the grade, hardly a rationale to keep some. Young layers make squads all the time, never make it and drop into obsurity, hence why there is criteria set. Hardly "crazy", create the page when the subject it notable, not the other way round. --Jimbo^[online] 00:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
          • Well I (and others) consider the and under-19 or 21 cap as well as playing for a Premier Division club passes WP:N! Maybe its time you have a fresh look at the crude and farcical WP:ATHLETE because recently almost 10 players that you consider "not notable" due to this guideline have not been deleted at AfD (despite the best efforts of a group of editors from the "FOOTY Project" and !vote together.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Again all required guidlines seem to be met for me. Retaining this information only adds to the notability of the league and teams therein. Centre mid (talk) 17:24, 25 July 2009 (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.