Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austin Brady (2nd nomination)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:06, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Austin Brady

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Was no consensus in 2014. Fails WP:GNG and never played in an WP:FPL. Playing in the last 16 of a European tournament doesn't make anyone notable unless it's two teams from a FPL. Dougal18 (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:29, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Struway2 made an excellent argument at the last AfD, unfortunately nobody has seen fit to improve the article much since then. For now I'm happy with the assumption that this does pass WP:GNG since the Irish Times archive search does bring up a lot of hits, but I can't access the archive to make a definitive declaration either way. SportingFlyer T·C 14:49, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't know why, but I feel this AfD is somewhat unfair, I am finding it hard to find sources, but that doesn't mean they are not there. The guy played a lot of Irish football, a couple of games in Champions League, two in UEFA Cup and one Cup Winners Cup. [1]. I think it's just finding the right sources to build a better article. Govvy (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails GNG and NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 20:05, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet the general notability guideline.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:23, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per me at the previous AfD. Assuming my opinion of the amount and quality of the Irish Times coverage would be the same now that I can't see it, as it was then when I could. At that time, I didn't have the inclination to expand the article, and I no longer have access to that newspaper archive, but just because I can't see that coverage doesn't mean it isn't there. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Struway -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:59, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per Struway2. Microwave Anarchist (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The Irish Times archive search returns 155 hits (not all about the footballer). I can only read the headlines but they are mostly match reports/team news and unlikely to give significant coverage of Brady. Dougal18 (talk) 16:35, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Both this discussion and the previous one have keep votes which essentially rest on the presumption that as the player had a lengthy career there must be sources. There does seem to be coverage but paywalls restrict the ability to assess whether this is significant enough for GNG. The problem is if we can't access sources we can neither use them to create and article nor assess their significance. As such they are essentially useless. I am relisting this as a courtesy to the keep voters to highlight any they have access to in order to support gng. However if this can't be done there is nothing in this discussion which indicates the sunset passes GNG.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 22:00, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 18:06, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG and [[WP:NFOOTBALL] CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We know that there is coverage. Multiple appearances in European competition are indication that he is notable. Participation in European competition could probably be included in WP:NFOOTBALL criterion. Кирилл С1 (talk) 13:00, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.