Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis Macleod (footballer): Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
GiantSnowman (talk | contribs) I politely suggest you strike your comment |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
(43 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' |
|||
<!--Template:Afd top |
|||
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> |
|||
The result was '''no consensus'''. Macleod doesn't pass [[WP:NFOOTY]] in its current wording, and I don't see the arguments for an exemption for Rangers as being particularly strong. NFOOTY is already an inclusive guideline, as it allows us to have articles on players who would not otherwise pass [[WP:GNG]]; to allow further exceptions based on clubs' histories seems to me to run contrary to [[WP:LOCALCONSENSUS]]. This leaves us with the possibility of whether Macleod satisfies the GNG directly. I saw strong opinions on either side, but ultimately no consensus as to whether the sources in the article and listed in the debate consist of significant coverage or not. Despite arguments that the coverage about Macleod was merely routine, I didn't find the "keep" arguments to be easily dismissable. Editors should feel free to renominate in a few months. — '''''[[User:Mr. Stradivarius|<span style="color: #194D00; font-family: Palatino, Times, serif">Mr. Stradivarius</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:Mr. Stradivarius|have a chat]])</sup> 04:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
===[[Lewis Macleod (footballer)]]=== |
===[[Lewis Macleod (footballer)]]=== |
||
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}} |
|||
<div class="infobox" style="width:50%">AfDs for this article:<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis MacLeod (footballer)}}{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis Macleod (footballer)}}</ul></div> |
<div class="infobox" style="width:50%">AfDs for this article:<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis MacLeod (footballer)}}{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis Macleod (footballer)}}</ul></div> |
||
:{{la|Lewis Macleod (footballer)}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis Macleod (footballer)|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 September 22#{{anchorencode:Lewis Macleod (footballer)}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{•}} <span class="plainlinks">[http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lewis_Macleod_(footballer) Stats]</span>) |
:{{la|Lewis Macleod (footballer)}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lewis Macleod (footballer)|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 September 22#{{anchorencode:Lewis Macleod (footballer)}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{•}} <span class="plainlinks">[http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lewis_Macleod_(footballer) Stats]</span>) |
||
:({{Find sources|Lewis Macleod (footballer)}}) |
:({{Find sources|Lewis Macleod (footballer)}}) |
||
Article is about a footballer who fails [[WP:GNG]] & [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. It was already deleted in August via AfD so I nominated it for speedy deletion via [[WP:G4]] which was declined by an admin with the comment ''Not at all the same as before'' who failed to inform me. But it still fails both guidelines. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|< |
Article is about a footballer who fails [[WP:GNG]] & [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. It was already deleted in August via AfD so I nominated it for speedy deletion via [[WP:G4]] which was declined by an admin with the comment ''Not at all the same as before'' who failed to inform me. But it still fails both guidelines. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|<span style="color:Fuchsia;">DUCK</span><span style="color:blue;">IS</span><span style="color:Fuchsia;">JAMMMY</span>]]☆★ 13:48, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:<small>Note: This discussion has been included in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Nominations for deletion and page moves|WikiProject Football]]'s list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|< |
:<small>Note: This discussion has been included in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football#Nominations for deletion and page moves|WikiProject Football]]'s list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|<span style="color:Fuchsia;">DUCK</span><span style="color:blue;">IS</span><span style="color:Fuchsia;">JAMMMY</span>]]☆★ 13:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)</small> |
||
:<small>Note: This discussion has been included in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Scotland task force#Nominations for deletion and page moves|Scottish task force]]'s list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|< |
:<small>Note: This discussion has been included in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Scotland task force#Nominations for deletion and page moves|Scottish task force]]'s list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|<span style="color:Fuchsia;">DUCK</span><span style="color:blue;">IS</span><span style="color:Fuchsia;">JAMMMY</span>]]☆★ 13:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)</small> |
||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Football|list of Football-related deletion discussions]]. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|< |
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Football|list of Football-related deletion discussions]]. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|<span style="color:Fuchsia;">DUCK</span><span style="color:blue;">IS</span><span style="color:Fuchsia;">JAMMMY</span>]]☆★ 13:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)</small> |
||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sportspeople|list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions]]. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|< |
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sportspeople|list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions]]. ★☆ [[User:DUCKISJAMMMY|<span style="color:Fuchsia;">DUCK</span><span style="color:blue;">IS</span><span style="color:Fuchsia;">JAMMMY</span>]]☆★ 13:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)</small> |
||
*'''Delete''' - fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. The deline of the speedy was wrong. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 14:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' - fails [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. The deline of the speedy was wrong. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 14:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete:''' Agree, the speedy should have stayed and this AfD should not be happening now but it is and this article fails NFOOTBALL and GNG. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 14:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Delete:''' Agree, the speedy should have stayed and this AfD should not be happening now but it is and this article fails NFOOTBALL and GNG. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 14:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' - per nom. Still fails [[WP:GNG]], still fails [[WP:NSPORT]]. [[User:Sir Sputnik|Sir Sputnik]] ([[User talk:Sir Sputnik|talk]]) 16:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' - per nom. Still fails [[WP:GNG]], still fails [[WP:NSPORT]]. [[User:Sir Sputnik|Sir Sputnik]] ([[User talk:Sir Sputnik|talk]]) 16:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' - Still fails [[WP:GNG]] and is a long way off passing [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. Not a huge difference between this and the original.[[User:Blethering Scot|< |
*'''Delete''' - Still fails [[WP:GNG]] and is a long way off passing [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. Not a huge difference between this and the original.[[User:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:Maroon;">Blethering</span>]] [[User talk:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:green;">Scot</span>]] 16:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - Absurd to suggest player does not pass [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:Sgt Elvan|Sgt Elvan]] ([[User talk:Sgt Elvan|talk]]) 16:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' - Absurd to suggest player does not pass [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:Sgt Elvan|Sgt Elvan]] ([[User talk:Sgt Elvan|talk]]) 16:10, 23 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
::Why? There are 8 references. 5 of the references are match reports, those are normal reports. 2 of the other references are just profiles... 1 of which dont even work. Only 1 reference really helps but that is it. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 17:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC) |
::Why? There are 8 references. 5 of the references are match reports, those are normal reports. 2 of the other references are just profiles... 1 of which dont even work. Only 1 reference really helps but that is it. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 17:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 26: | Line 33: | ||
*'''Keep'''. This is not a G4 speedy as some have said above; since that AfD, Macleod's career has moved on considerably. He had never played for the Rangers first team at the time of the first AfD. Since then he has started every league game Rangers have played. Ordinarily, playing in the Scottish Third Division would not result in a player passing [[WP:GNG]]. But Rangers are not an ordinary Third Division team. Their activities achieve saturation coverage in the sports sections of Scottish media. One size fits all application of [[WP:NFOOTY]] is inappropriate in this case. When as a sportsman your name makes up the first two words of an article in ''[[The Scotsman]]'' ([http://www.scotsman.com/sport/rangers-4-1-montrose-victory-moves-gers-up-to-second-1-2543010]), its a sure sign that [[WP:GNG]] is met. [[User:Oldelpaso|Oldelpaso]] ([[User talk:Oldelpaso|talk]]) 21:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep'''. This is not a G4 speedy as some have said above; since that AfD, Macleod's career has moved on considerably. He had never played for the Rangers first team at the time of the first AfD. Since then he has started every league game Rangers have played. Ordinarily, playing in the Scottish Third Division would not result in a player passing [[WP:GNG]]. But Rangers are not an ordinary Third Division team. Their activities achieve saturation coverage in the sports sections of Scottish media. One size fits all application of [[WP:NFOOTY]] is inappropriate in this case. When as a sportsman your name makes up the first two words of an article in ''[[The Scotsman]]'' ([http://www.scotsman.com/sport/rangers-4-1-montrose-victory-moves-gers-up-to-second-1-2543010]), its a sure sign that [[WP:GNG]] is met. [[User:Oldelpaso|Oldelpaso]] ([[User talk:Oldelpaso|talk]]) 21:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
::But how? Look at the references. Almost all of them are match reports for youth internationals and player profiles. If this guy is given keeps then I might as well create articles for players in the [[USL Premier Development League]]. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 21:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
::But how? Look at the references. Almost all of them are match reports for youth internationals and player profiles. If this guy is given keeps then I might as well create articles for players in the [[USL Premier Development League]]. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 21:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::Some more examples of coverage: Macleod signed a new contract a couple of weeks ago, coverage of that includes [http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/lewis-macleod-wants-to-repay-faith-1321873 This Daily Record piece about him and him alone], plus a number of stories in which he was very prominent e.g. [http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19564270 BBC] [http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/starlets-are-three-of-a-kind-that-will-give-ally-a-winning-hand.18904361 Glasgow Evening Times]. This is a different order of magnitude to the usual level of coverage for someone playing in that division, it is more akin to someone playing at a higher level like [[Andre Wisdom]]. I'm not suggesting Rangers players should be given a free pass, but when a team gets gates of 40,000 and has 20 league games a season shown by the UK's two main sports broadcasters ([http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/aug/03/espn-spl-rangers-contract?cat=football&type=article]), then those associated with it deserve a closer examination than a dismissive "fails WP:NFOOTY" |
:::Some more examples of coverage: Macleod signed a new contract a couple of weeks ago, coverage of that includes [http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/lewis-macleod-wants-to-repay-faith-1321873 This Daily Record piece about him and him alone], plus a number of stories in which he was very prominent e.g. [http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19564270 BBC] [http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/starlets-are-three-of-a-kind-that-will-give-ally-a-winning-hand.18904361 Glasgow Evening Times]. This is a different order of magnitude to the usual level of coverage for someone playing in that division, it is more akin to someone playing at a higher level like [[Andre Wisdom]]. I'm not suggesting Rangers players should be given a free pass, but when a team gets gates of 40,000 and has 20 league games a season shown by the UK's two main sports broadcasters ([http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/aug/03/espn-spl-rangers-contract?cat=football&type=article]), then those associated with it deserve a closer examination than a dismissive "fails WP:NFOOTY" type comment. [[User:Oldelpaso|Oldelpaso]] ([[User talk:Oldelpaso|talk]]) 11:36, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep'''. I'm not keen on making Rangers a special case because they still play in a league that is not fully professional, and this guy fails [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. But he patently passes [[WP:GNG]], beyond simple match reports. [[User:Bretonbanquet|Bretonbanquet]] ([[User talk:Bretonbanquet|talk]]) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep'''. I'm not keen on making Rangers a special case because they still play in a league that is not fully professional, and this guy fails [[WP:NFOOTBALL]]. But he patently passes [[WP:GNG]], beyond simple match reports. [[User:Bretonbanquet|Bretonbanquet]] ([[User talk:Bretonbanquet|talk]]) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' This guy is one of the exceptions that breaks the usual rule. And I'm saying this as a leaning deletionist who's usually against the silly guidelines whereby a player instantly gets an article after playing one league cup game for a League Two club etc. Rangers are one of the two best supported clubs in Scotland (one of the best supported clubs in Europe). Any regular player for them will likely be all over national news regardless of the level the club play at. [[User:Delusion23|< |
*'''Keep''' This guy is one of the exceptions that breaks the usual rule. And I'm saying this as a leaning deletionist who's usually against the silly guidelines whereby a player instantly gets an article after playing one league cup game for a League Two club etc. Rangers are one of the two best supported clubs in Scotland (one of the best supported clubs in Europe). Any regular player for them will likely be all over national news regardless of the level the club play at. [[User:Delusion23|'''<span style="color:green;">Del</span><big><sub style="color:black;">♉</sub></big><span style="color:green;">sion</span><span style="color:black;">23</span>''']] [[User talk:Delusion23|<span style="color:green;">(talk)</span>]] 22:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Comment''' - clearly fails [[WP:NSPORTS]] but I can't see any evidence online that he meets [[WP:GNG]]. There are a few mentions of him in match reports and by stats sites. If he has received significant coverage in offline sources, proof is required. [[User:Hack|Hack]] ([[User talk:Hack|talk]]) 02:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' - clearly fails [[WP:NSPORTS]] but I can't see any evidence online that he meets [[WP:GNG]]. There are a few mentions of him in match reports and by stats sites. If he has received significant coverage in offline sources, proof is required. [[User:Hack|Hack]] ([[User talk:Hack|talk]]) 02:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' Believe this is just the sort of article where WP needs to move with the times. Things change, a major club has been placed in a non-pro league. This does not detract from the fact that Rangers are an important and notable club. Players who play for them are notable. [[WP:NFOOTY]] says certain players are 'presumed notable'. It doesn't say others can't be.--[[User:Egghead06|Egghead06]] ([[User talk:Egghead06|talk]]) 05:52, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' Believe this is just the sort of article where WP needs to move with the times. Things change, a major club has been placed in a non-pro league. This does not detract from the fact that Rangers are an important and notable club. Players who play for them are notable. [[WP:NFOOTY]] says certain players are 'presumed notable'. It doesn't say others can't be.--[[User:Egghead06|Egghead06]] ([[User talk:Egghead06|talk]]) 05:52, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
Line 71: | Line 78: | ||
:::::To paint the "big club" view of Rangers as "complete and utter POV" is itself a flagrant violation of [[WP:NPOV]]. Match attendances, tv audiences, media coverage, wage bills, history, turnover, all objective, quantifiable evidence - true regardless of opinion - in support of such a conclusion. You can cling to a rigid, inflexible application of [[WP:FOOTY]] guidelines if you wish, but to deny the exceptional nature of Rangers status within the 4th tier of Scottish Football is surely an abuse of common sense too far. [[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 16:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
:::::To paint the "big club" view of Rangers as "complete and utter POV" is itself a flagrant violation of [[WP:NPOV]]. Match attendances, tv audiences, media coverage, wage bills, history, turnover, all objective, quantifiable evidence - true regardless of opinion - in support of such a conclusion. You can cling to a rigid, inflexible application of [[WP:FOOTY]] guidelines if you wish, but to deny the exceptional nature of Rangers status within the 4th tier of Scottish Football is surely an abuse of common sense too far. [[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 16:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
::::::Not at all. If Man Utd had to play in front of 15,000 people would they suddenly be a 'small club'? If Hamilton Accies managed to get 50,000 spectators thanks to brilliant marketing, would they suddenly be a 'big club'? Wage bills - if the chairman wins the lottery and Accies decide to double everyone's wages, are they suddenly twice as big as before? It is nothing but opinion. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
::::::Not at all. If Man Utd had to play in front of 15,000 people would they suddenly be a 'small club'? If Hamilton Accies managed to get 50,000 spectators thanks to brilliant marketing, would they suddenly be a 'big club'? Wage bills - if the chairman wins the lottery and Accies decide to double everyone's wages, are they suddenly twice as big as before? It is nothing but opinion. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::::::I'm not talking about your make-believe examples, I'm talking about Rangers Football Club in the 4th tier of Scottish Football. If your opinion is that the size of a club relative to another one - even in the case of Rangers vs. the likes of East Stirling/Annan - is impossible to determine from a NPOV, |
:::::::I'm not talking about your make-believe examples, I'm talking about Rangers Football Club in the 4th tier of Scottish Football. If your opinion is that the size of a club relative to another one - even in the case of Rangers vs. the likes of East Stirling/Annan - is impossible to determine from a NPOV, you are, in this regard, very far removed from common sense.[[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 16:37, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::::::: You ''should'' have left it there - I politely suggest you strike your comment. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
:::::::: You ''should'' have left it there - I politely suggest you strike your comment. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
||
::::To get away from accusations of comparing apples and oranges attracted by Egghead06's Accrington Stanley comparison, how about [[Barrie McKay]] as a directly comparable case? His career trajectory is almost identical to that of Macleod with one difference: he played 14 minutes of football for Rangers on the final day of last season, something that reports of that match typically use a single sentence to describe. Is the current application of [[WP:FOOTYN]] really so rigid as to mean that one single sentence of coverage is the difference between keep and delete? A sentence that, to read some of the comments here, might be described as [[WP:ROUTINE]]? Yes, OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and all that, but I really fail to see a significant difference in coverage here. Bear in mind that [[Wikipedia:Notability (sports)]] (of which [[WP:FOOTYN]] is part) grew out of [[Wikipedia:Notability (people)]], where it is listed under "additional criteria". There, it states ''Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included.'' Treating it as the Alpha and Omega strikes me as valuing the letter of a guideline over its spirit to an excessive degree. [[User:Oldelpaso|Oldelpaso]] ([[User talk:Oldelpaso|talk]]) 16:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Does McKay meet NFOOTBALL? Yes. Does he meet GNG? No. Should the article be deleted? No. Why? Because the objective of NFOOTBALL is to give breathing space i.e. it is assumed that a player in a FPL will meet have received enough coverage to meet GNG, and time should be allowed for that. If McKay never plays at a higher level and fades into obscurity, and there is no more coverage, then we would have to look at an AfD. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 16:55, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I think ref #4 and #6 would satisfy GNG. I believe they are enough to keep the article, considering that he also (barely) passes NFOOTY. <span>– [[User:Kosm1fent|<span style="color:#191970">'''Kosm'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Kosm1fent|<span style="color:#36454F">'''1'''</span>]][[User Talk:Kosm1fent|<span style="color:#00416A">'''fent'''</span>]]</span> 16:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::::And in #6 he gives a name check to [[Lewis Macleod (footballer)|Lewis Macleod]].--[[User:Egghead06|Egghead06]] ([[User talk:Egghead06|talk]]) 17:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Half a line about Macleod is not significant coverage. <span>– [[User:Kosm1fent|<span style="color:#191970">'''Kosm'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Kosm1fent|<span style="color:#36454F">'''1'''</span>]][[User Talk:Kosm1fent|<span style="color:#00416A">'''fent'''</span>]]</span> 18:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::McCay is 17. I dont know about you guys but when it comes to players who are 21 or under and pass NFOOTY but fail GNG I just leave it because they are still to young (in McCays case... very young) and are assumed to eventually meet GNG. Not every player will have a huge article at the age of 17. --[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 19:13, 25 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::There is absolutely no reason why Rangers should be and ever will be a special case. They either meet NFOOTY which for two years they wont or they meet [[WP:GNG]]. Rangers players will receive higher levels of coverage than other third divisions that is no doubt but match reports will always be trivial coverage by nature so there has to be more to meet [[WP:GNG]]. I have got a lower threshold than most i have to say, however I'm not being swayed much here because the majority of the arguments here are either trying to say we should make a special case here because its Rangers, which is ludicrous or they are not very strong statements. Remember the article looked like this[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lewis_Macleod_%28footballer%29&diff=514014904&oldid=513415650] which is exactly what it was like when deleted the first time, It was a clear speedy for most. The article now although far more informative does not meet [[WP:GNG]]. Rather than trying to argue special case which wont happen why not actually improve the article to show it meets GNG until then it should be deleted or userfied for improvement.[[User:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:Maroon;">Blethering</span>]] [[User talk:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:green;">Scot</span>]] 00:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::oh and ive read through the sources, 18 of the 25 can totally be discounted for proving notability the others i would count towards are the ones talking around him signing new contract which is generally considered a trivial coverage although i don't totally discount it. Also I'm just not seeing enough coverage on different events that aren't match reports or go way beyond routine. I think as ive said all along alot of these young players ultimately after time will meet GNG no doubt, but until they do completely they should be treated like all the rest. I would prefer someone requested this be incubated and worked on it. At the end of the day if it was worked on properly maybe it could be done. Lets face it NFooty means nothing if an article can be proven to and clearly meets GNG, this article in its current state at this present time does not.[[User:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:Maroon;">Blethering</span>]] [[User talk:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:green;">Scot</span>]] 00:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Delete''' - fails the general [[WP:NSPORTS]] criteria as well as the football-specific notability criteria. Fails [[WP:GNG]] as the only coverage the subject has received beyond [[Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Questionable_sources|standard tabloid fare]] is in routine match reports. The case for Rangers exceptionalism is not supported by the lack of reliable sources. [[User:Hack|Hack]] ([[User talk:Hack|talk]]) 01:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::What would reliable sources regarding "Rangers exceptionalism" be? A third party source stating the Club's league attendance is [http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/scottish/rangers-topsyturvy-season-taking-a-heavy-toll-on-embattled-mccoist-8175958.htmlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/scottish/rangers-topsyturvy-season-taking-a-heavy-toll-on-embattled-mccoist-8175958.html "the 16th best in Europe"] perhaps? Or 55 times the [http://itv.stats.football365.com/dom/SCO/D3/attend.html combined average] of their league rivals? One couldn't imagine a more convincing case for "Rangers exceptionalism" if one tried. The 16th best-attended club in EUROPE, and their star young player isn't on Wikipedia? Oh well, guidelines are guidelines are guidelines. If the users suffer, tough luck. [[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 07:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::It's a pretty simple proposition, prove that the subject of this article meets [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:Hack|Hack]] ([[User talk:Hack|talk]]) 08:21, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Exactly - Gefetane, you've gone to great lengths to show how notable the ''club'' is, but not the player. Playing for a notable club does not mean you yourself are notable - if that was the case, we would have thousands of articles on lowly English non-league clubs. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 08:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::::So what's the verdict?[[Special:Contributions/27.154.208.20|27.154.208.20]] ([[User talk:27.154.208.20|talk]]) 18:11, 26 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment''' - This discussion has gotten way off topic, and I suggest we stop discussing if Rangers are a big club or if MacLeod passes [[WP:NFOOTBALL]], which is both pretty obvious imo. I think we should give some slack to these "amateurs" playing at the fourth tier in Scottish football, as they are playing for the biggest amateur side in the world (I guess we can agree on that), and still have a lot of media-coverage (even in Norwegian sources). If there are some footballers that doesn't pass NFOOTBALL who should have an article, the Rangers-players would be first in line, but I'm not saying that they should get a free pass just because they are playing for Rangers. When it comes to MacLeod, I'm not convinced that this article passes [[WP:GNG]] yet, although he is close. [[User:Mentoz86|Mentoz86]] ([[User talk:Mentoz86|talk]]) 09:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::Does Wikipedia allow for flexibility in isolated cases regarding guidelines such as [[WP:NFOOTY]]? YES. |
|||
::Is a club of Rangers FC's size (media profile, general notability, 16th highest home attendance in Europe, even wikipedia page hits, however you want to define it) playing in the 4th tier of Scottish football sufficiently exceptional to justify flexibility? YES. |
|||
::Is Lewis Macleod a prominent player enough player? YES - started all 12 games. |
|||
::This seems to be a debate between on one hand wikipedia principles of Common sense/flexibility, on the other hand strict enforcement of guidelines to the letter. I'll remain interested on which side wins through. [[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 11:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::What i cannot understand is why you are determined to prove the notability of the club, which is in no doubt at all. NFooty isn't even relevant as he does not meet it, all that leaves is the guideline that matters GNG. If you want to make amendments to the footy guideline then raise it at [[WP:Footy]]. in regards GNG, if you actually work on the article then maybe you can prove he does meet it. And i agree with Mentoz he isnt far off GNG which is a point ive made about Rangers, which is that with time these players will likely meet GNG but that time should be given.[[User:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:Maroon;">Blethering</span>]] [[User talk:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:green;">Scot</span>]] 18:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Delete''' - Non–notable Fourth Division footballer. [[User:Clavdia chauchat|Clavdia chauchat]] ([[User talk:Clavdia chauchat|talk]]) 18:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Neutral''' I'm widely seen as a deletionist when it comes to borderline players (I don't see myself as one, but others would put me in that camp). But even I think some of the rationales above are extreme. While I wouldn't go as far as to come off the fence and say that the player is notable, people who have argued delete need to have a long, hard think about the reasons they are giving. Some are suggesting that we ''completely'' disregard reliable match reports, appearances in televised games, and playing in front of tens of thousands of people as factors to at least ''consider'' when deciding if a player meets the GNG. I can see the argument for deletion, but not on those grounds.<p>If we're seriously looking at deletion, I would actually be more comfortable with an [[WP:IAR|IAR]] delete. It could be argued that deleting the minority of Rangers players who haven't played in a "fully-pro" league but ''might'' meet the GNG is preferable to opening ourselves up to allegations of pro-Rangers bias, and/or the floodgate to creations of non-notable players who have played at the same level of football. Perhaps for those reasons keeping this article is more trouble than its worth. But under the standards adhered to by some delete !voters above, a significant percentage of Football League players would not meet the GNG – a far larger percentage than I believe don't merit full-blown articles. —[[User talk:WaitingForConnection|WFC]]— <sub>'''[[User:WaitingForConnection/FL wishlist|FL wishlist]]'''</sub> 09:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::You could argue that keeping a players article because the club they play for is notable is an extreme view as well. Players should be given time to actually meet GNG and shouldn't be forced through on the basis the club is notable.[[User:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:Maroon;">Blethering</span>]] [[User talk:Blethering Scot|<span style="color:green;">Scot</span>]] 20:21, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::How many players (with wikipedia pages) in the lower professional English leagues have, like Lewis Macleod, received person-specific articles in national newspapers? Not many I'd suggest. Any rule/guideline is bound to be undermined by an exceptional case every now and again - a club of Rangers' national/international profile in the 4th tier is exactly that. If a rule cannot be flexed on appropriate occasions, it is an ass. As far as I am aware, stringent adherence to guidelines is actively discouraged within Wikipedia. Why that message has bypassed so many in this discussion baffles me. [[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 20:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
'''Comment:''' Can someone just answer this question... If Rangers were still in the Premier League would Macleod be playing for the first-team like he is now that they are in the 4th Division of Scottish Football?--[[User:Arsenalkid700|Arsenalkid700]] ([[User talk:Arsenalkid700|talk]]) 21:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::'''No''' - This is a completely different 'Rangers' who emerged from the ashes of the old club who are being liquidated. They had to enter at the bottom rung of the ladder because a Newco, as the name suggests, is a new club with no history. All Rangers' better players effected their egress when liquidatation wasn't staved off. Under 19 players like Macleod have been drafted in to fill the void, along with some anonymous journeymen. They are no more notable than whoever is waddling about for [[Darlington 1883|Darlington]] this season. [[User:Clavdia chauchat|Clavdia chauchat]] ([[User talk:Clavdia chauchat|talk]]) 00:09, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Delete'''. There's no argument about the subject failing [[WP:NFOOTBALL]] as it currently stands, and I'm not convinced that [[WP:LOCALCONSENSUS]] lets us change that guideline here by declaring Rangers to be a special case. <s>WFC above says he'd be more comfortable with an appeal to [[WP:IAR]] to keep the article.</s> IAR applies when the rule to be ignored stops us improving the encyclopedia. I'm further not convinced that the encyclopedia would be generally improved by invoking IAR to include this article, and I'm ''absolutely'' sure that the encyclopedia ''would not'' be improved by invoking IAR to declare Rangers players notable ''per se''. Which brings us to [[WP:GNG]].<p>If the effort expended here in support of the article being kept because Rangers are a special case had been applied to adding all the presumed media coverage to Mr Macleod's article, then there's be no argument about his passing GNG. But it hasn't. The article's improved since its nomination here, but as already stated above, most of the sources just verify his appearance in various matches. Of the others, several are variations on his signing a new contract with the club and the others show that young players (including Mr Macleod) are getting a chance because the club are playing at a low level. I don't see that as meeting GNG, particularly in light of the definition of multiple sources (see explanatory note #3 at [[WP:GNG]]). If Mr Macleod's career continues as he hopes, then he's sure to get enough individual coverage to pass GNG in his own right, but I don't think he's there yet. cheers, [[User:Struway2|Struway2]] ([[User talk:Struway2|talk]]) 22:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:*At the risk of coming across as pedantic, my argument is that if things go the way they seem to be going, I would prefer an IAR ''deletion''. The distinction is unimportant in the context of this article's future, but <u>very</u> important if we are talking about the standard of proof needed to determine notability. —[[User talk:WaitingForConnection|WFC]]— <sub>'''[[User:WaitingForConnection/FL wishlist|FL wishlist]]'''</sub> 06:36, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::*Indeed. And it isn't pedantic to point out that I seemed not to have read what you wrote... Your remarks were clear enough when they first appeared: but I ignored ''my'' rules about not posting at bedtime once thinking became difficult, wrote "keep" instead of "delete", and then based an argument on what ''I'd'' written instead of on what ''you'' had. Sorry. Though the argument's still valid :-) cheers, [[User:Struway2|Struway2]] ([[User talk:Struway2|talk]]) 07:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::My view on this is has it has been for six years. As an inclusionist I believe we set the bar for football notability way too high. If we are ever to encourage new editors (and the number of editors is falling) articles like this are just what we need. Try explaining to a new editor that Rangers are notable and watched by 50,000 and have their games televised but, no their players are not notable. My views are only in the interest of expanding WP with good, sourced articles and I have no love/hate for Mr Macleod or Rangers. Deleting articles whose sources don't quite meet GNG is not the way to expansion--[[User:Egghead06|Egghead06]] ([[User talk:Egghead06|talk]]) 08:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I believe we set the bar for football notability in the wrong place: the concept of "fully professional league" is proven unsustainable. Though I tend towards including players who've had a career in "lesser" leagues rather than kids who've had five minutes in front of a big-club crowd. It bothers me that articles on players with a lengthy career in a league not considered fully professional is deleted unless it's approaching good article status, and it particularly bothers me that recently, players with several years worth of career ''including'' appearances in fully professional leagues are attracting delete !votes at AfD if the only sources available are in a relatively obscure foreign language. I think there's more damage done to the encyclopedia by deleting real articles on players ''with'' a career already than by deleting articles on kids who might have a career sometime in the future.<p>I know this isn't really the place to discuss discouraging new editors, but one thing that must be disheartening is when someone comes along and removes most of an article's content because it's unsourced, rather than doing a 2-minute search for sources themselves and/or explaining to the creator why that content needs sources and giving them time and encouragement to find some. There's very little that really needs ripping straight out on BLP grounds. cheers, [[User:Struway2|Struway2]] ([[User talk:Struway2|talk]]) 08:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
::::::With respect, you all miss the point. The "fully professional leagues" rule is fine EXCEPT for EXCEPTIONAL cases. Rangers in the 4th tier is - to any informed observer - the definition of an exceptional case. Therefore, Wikipedia's inherent flexibility regarding guidelines and exceptions - should be utilised for a player who's a regular (12 out of 12) First Team player. [[User:Gefetane|Gefetane]] ([[User talk:Gefetane|talk]]) 12:26, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::First, the FPL rule is far from fine. There are top-level leagues throughout the world with massive press and TV coverage of both clubs and players but whose players' articles, even where the player has many appearances, are deleted without a murmur because those leagues are not proven fully professional (and because, quite understandably this being the English Wikipedia, there are fewer editors with the language skills to expand those articles to meet GNG). Second, with respect, we don't all miss the point: some of us just don't agree with it. cheers, [[User:Struway2|Struway2]] ([[User talk:Struway2|talk]]) 12:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> |