Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonio Siyaka

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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio Siyaka

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

Article's subject may meet WP:NSPORTS but does not appear to meet the more-fundamental requirements of WP:GNG. Lacks multiple, independent, reliable, and especially non-trivial references. KDS4444^Talk 16:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belarus-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL, needs improving to meet WP:GNG. We traditionally allow a grace period, especially for younger players. Has nominator tried searching for native-language sources? Giant Snowman 09:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes WP:NFOOTY, current consensus for young players is that is sufficient. Needs expanding by a native speaker not deleting. Fenix down (talk) 16:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - while Siyaka has made two substitute's appearances in the fully-pro league, I cannot find any Russian, Belarusian or English language sources that would be significant coverage. Let's use common sense here - even though this might be slightly over the NFOOTBALL presumed notability line, I don't see any evidence that the article could satisfy the GNG unless he does something significant (which violates CRYSTAL). Jogurney (talk) 16:10, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per WP:NFOOTY. Here's some media coverage: Siyaka promoted to Dnepr's senior team, This year's most promising young players of the league - BlameRuiner (talk) 18:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw a similar article about his promotion to the senior team, and it is just routine coverage. The feature in Tribuna is not routine, but it contains very little information. If there was something else I might agree on passing the GNG, but I don't think the article can until Siyaka actually does something notable. Jogurney (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:GNG is guideline, not policy. That's why we have other guidelines such as NFOOTBALL, to help us determine special situations. Since whether or not this meets NFOOTBALL isn't up for debate, this seems clear to me. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:54, 1 August 2014 (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.