Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sawyer Gaffney

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. apparent consensus DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Sawyer Gaffney

Sawyer Gaffney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP about an amateur footballer who played 14 minutes in a single United Soccer League match on an academy (non-professional) contract more than one year ago. Although there is concensus that the USL is a fully-pro league, his substitute's appearance was as an amateur and we have a long-standing consensus that a very minimal amount of play such as this doesn't meet the spirit of WP:NFOOTBALL. Also, although I found one decent article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the other coverage of this footballer is routine and doesn't come close to passing WP:GNG. A PROD was removed on the grounds that the article satisfies NFOOTBALL, but I don't believe that is accurate (particularly in spirit). Jogurney (talk) 15:31, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Jogurney (talk) 15:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

• Keep passes WP:FOOTY and the subject is 20 years and just made his debut and see no reason in deleting it after he has made his debut and is currently playing. SNGs including WP:FOOTY exist to provide for the inclusion of certain defined subjects that cannot immediately be shown to pass GNG. An SNG provides for a presumption of notability, not a presumption of non-notability An SNG cannot be used to exclude/delete an article when the subject passes GNG, but the reverse is patently absurd because that would negate the entire reason for the existence of SNGs particularly for a player currently playing and only 20 years old.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • I believe this is a unique situation where a footballer who is an amateur played in a "fully-pro league." Also, we have consistently determined that NFOOTBALL should be applied on a common sense basis when a footballer so narrowly crosses the bright-line (most recently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdullah Al-Khethiri and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wouter Soomer). Note that this footballer hasn't begun a professional career at this point, so to say he "is currently playing" is misleading. Like most amateur footballers, we have no reason to believe he will ever sign a professional contract until the point that it actually happens. Jogurney (talk) 17:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

• Question Isn't the second tier a semi-pro league? Wouldn't he fail NFooty? Govvy (talk) 22:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • The USL is listed at WP:FPL. I'm skeptical (why does a fully-pro league allow amateurs to participate in matches?), but that's a discussion for the Talk page at FPL. Jogurney (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
• Show Cause Did my own search and only good source I found was this - [1]. Since they player is a recent player, barely meets the SNG, and plays in an English-speaking country, I think it's reasonable to ask to see sources as opposed to just presuming they exist since they will take a while to find. RonSigPi (talk) 00:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

• Reply Seriously is that all you got to go on? If that was the case I would also have a footy article on here for playing for Hatfield Town! But as it stands, the article fails WP:GNG due to lack of coverage. Govvy (talk) 10:59, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Govvy, what? I just said we should need to see sources and not just presume. That is why I said show cause - subject meets the SNG, but let's not just presume sources exist, but lets actually make an effort to find them since he is an English-speaking based player that is recent so should have a number of sources. I found one article, so that is a start. If we find some more, then I will say keep. If not, then I will say delete. I tried and showed what I could. If nothing more is produced, then its pretty clear we delete. Did you not understand what I said or understand what show cause means? RonSigPi (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@RonSigPi: SNG? That's just a redirect, are you referring to GNG? He still fails and also the club seems to operate as semi-pro and doesn't sound like they operate full professional. Govvy (talk) 20:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

No, referring to WP:NFOOTY. He meets it. But it is just a guideline. Considering the reasons I gave, I think we need to show the subject meets GNG. As of now, with only the one source I found, subject does not. RonSigPi (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

When did you say that? And I am not even sure Richmond Kickers are operating as a fully pro club, if anything it sounds like they operate in a semi-pro format and if that's the case and some evidence points towards that there are a number of clubs in the second tier of US football operating in this format brings to front that tier two is not truly a professional league, there for he would fail NFooty. Also, are you Pharaoh of the Wizards? Govvy (talk) 10:07, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

@Govvy ??? No, I am not Pharaoh of the Wizards. Please explain that logic. Pharaoh of the Wizards said keep. I said we need to find sources, as of now we have not found them, so delete until it is shown otherwise. Why would you think the same editor would give a first comment for keep and a second one for delete? RonSigPi (talk) 12:20, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Comment SNG including WP:FOOTY,WP:NCRIC,WP:NHOCKEY ,WP:NBASKETBALL are meant for this purpose exist to provide for the inclusion of certain defined subjects for example just after making there debut and the threshold is also Have appeared in one game is clearly mentioned in all SNG a Football , basketball ,Hockey or Cricket player will not immediately pass WP: GNG after appearing in just in one game in all cases.They are meant to allow a grace period to meet GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I still don't understand why you use SNG that jumps to the CAT, NFooty is there to cover the player, GNG is the primary guideline above it. You only have to define those two elements to pass of fail! It's been pretty straight forward, I question if the second devision is truly pro, if not, then the player fails NFooty. The article still fails GNG!. Right now, because I question the legitimacy of the second div being fully pro. That in turns leads me to *delete the player article, which currently is failing GNG. Govvy (talk) 23:13, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

• Delete - fails WP:GNG, and plenty of past AFD consensus that barely, technically passing WP:NFOOTBALL isn't enough. GiantSnowman 12:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
• Comment Sawyer Gaffney is a come up through the Club's academy Richmond United’s USSF Development Academy player not a amateur .Every major WP:FPL club has Football academy including Man U ,Real Madrid players coming through clubs ranks are not amateurs. AFD have shown consensus that young players still involved in NFOOTY or other SNG passing competitions are notable despite low numbers of appearance as it is presumed they will make further FPL appearances and is the case in other sports that is why the threshold is appeared in Have appeared in one game in all SNG . Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:25, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
  • That's not true. Read the source I added to the article - he was an amateur when he made that appearance for Richmond Kickers because otherwise he would have lost eligibility to play college soccer. Jogurney (talk) 14:23, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
• ReplyThe Legal terms of the contract are irrelevant as far as notability is concerned they apparently been modified to allow him to play for Davidson College for his collegiate career.The USL article do not explicitly state he signed an amateur contact ,but he signed a contact with a professional football club .Now players even sign contacts on pay-as-you-play deal with them getting Zero if they do not play Owen Hargreaves and Micheal Owen .The terms and salary are irrelevant.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 21:28, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
• Delete - one appearance (to technically meet NFOOTY) is not enough when he comprehensively fails GNG. Some COMMONSENSE is needed here, and plenty of AFD precedent exists to say that barely passing NFOOTBALL is not enough when you fail GNG, see Oscar Otazu, Vyacheslav Seletskiy, Aleksandr Salimov, Andrei Semenchuk, Artyom Dubovsky, Cosmos Munegabe, Marios Antoniades, Scott Sinclair, Fredrik Hesselberg-Meyer, Matheus Eccard, Roland Szabó (2nd nomination), Metodija Stepanovski, Linas Klimavičius, Takumi Ogawa, Nicky Fish and Andrei Nițu, amongst others. Fenix down (talk) 19:56, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
• Delete fails the general notability guidelines. The special guidelines exist mainly for cases where sources might be hard to find online. Present soccer players in the US are not such a case. If the sources are not identified, it is safe to assume they do not exist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:09, 23 October 2017 (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.