Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Lucas

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. The NFOOTY points are moot, the question here is does the player pass GNG. Some sources have been presented to indicate GNG, but there is a lack of consensus whether they are enough. Fenix down (talk) 12:37, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Lucas (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)

Fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG. -- Tropicanan (talk) 01:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Tropicanan (talk) 01:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Tropicanan (talk) 01:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Tropicanan (talk) 01:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes WP:NFOOTBALL. Has played in the A-League. Simione001 (talk) 01:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes WP:NFOOTY has played in a WP:FPL that is A-League.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - meets WP:NFOOTBALL; needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 09:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. Bookscale (talk) 09:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete changed from a Weak keep. - He meets WP:NFOOTBALL but I don't know about WP:GNG as he only played the one match against Sydney FC. HawkAussie (talk) 00:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thinking it over and @Levivich: makes a good point as he played less than 15 minutes of play in his only appearance. Their is mentions of him playing from Olympic in the FFA Cup but that is just match reports. HawkAussie (talk) 03:05, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Per longstanding consensus: one appearance (10 minutes of play) [1] in an FPL league, and no indication of meeting GNG, is not enough to show notability. The one appearance was like seven years ago, and the player has been playing semi-pro ball since. – Levivich 21:53, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  reaffirming my !vote post-addition of new sources post-relist... none appear to be secondary, independent, reliable, and in-depth. This is the closest I see and it's not sigcov IMO. – Levivich 05:28, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No significant coverage = no article. Arguments that we should create an exception to that principle for single-match footballers are not just uncompelling but ridiculous.—Mkativerata (talk) 03:10, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - if the article meets WP:NFOOTBALL then it meets, regardless of number of games played. Suggestions that it should be deleted due to a small amount of games played starts to blur the guidelines of WP:NFOOTBALL. Additionally, the player is currently the top scorer in the 2019 FFA Cup which is a national competition playing against clubs from WP:FPL so if anything, the article could be strengthened. Clifton9 (talk) 07:42, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - He passes WP:NFOOTBALL. The only exceptions should be if a player plays a minimum amount of time in a fully-pro league in his whole career and they're retired. In this case Lucas played for a WP:FPL club, and has a career in the 2nd tier (semi-pro). Add to him currently being top scorer in the domestic cup as Clifton9 said, and this shows this article can be expanded, not that it should be deleted. --SuperJew (talk) 08:47, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, there's no evidence of the article subject meeting WP:GNG beyond passing references in routine coverage. The subject clearly fails WP:BASIC and WP:SPORTBASIC. Hack (talk) 09:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - if the article meets WP:NFOOTBALL then it meets, regardless of number of games played. Suggestions that it should be deleted due to a small amount of games played starts to blur the guidelines of WP:NFOOTBALL. Article certainly needs improving but if it's deleted, then it is contradicting [2] Victoryboy (talk) 09:52, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - NFOOTY passed with career ongoing, which is consensus to keep; e.g. AfD/Mats van Kins, AfD/Sean Karani and AfD/Danish Irfan Azman. One app is also consensus, one that I am fine with being enforced, but it doesn't apply here - as mentioned by SuperJew. R96Skinner (talk) 11:49, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Mats van Kins = 2 FPL games, 20 years old, still playing in top-tier league (Eredivisie). Sean Karani = 18 years old, 4 FPL games (at the time of the AfD), still playing in second-tier USL Championship. Danish Irfan Azman = 20 years old, 19 FPL games, still playing in top-tier Singapore Premier League (and that AfD was withdrawn). These three are in no way comparable to this article subject, Chris Lucas, age 27, whose single FPL appearance was seven years ago and has been playing semi-professional ball ever since. Not a single source that could even potentially qualify for GNG has been put forward here and there are none in the article. The consensus in such situations is to delete, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phakamani Mngadi, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romain Carbonnier, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Pawiak, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean-Paul Nomel, and many others like it (see User:Levivich/NFooty AfDs#Some NFooty for a list). – Levivich 14:39, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. Mngadi, for example, vanished off a cliff after leaving his FPL club. That's very different to leaving an FPL club and joining multiple clubs one tier below the previous club's FPL; Lucas' case is equivalent to leaving an English League 2 team and joining an English National League team, in these terms. R96Skinner (talk) 15:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...and then staying in the English National League system for seven years, generating zero in-depth coverage in reliable sources during those seven years. I call that "not notable". :-) The fact that this guy played for 10 minutes in an FPL seven years ago is a fluke–it is no reason to !vote keep–there is no logic or rational thinking (nevermind policy) behind such a position. It's a complete "WTF" kind of argument... 10 minutes and you get a bio in Wikipedia? With no GNG sources, but just because of the 10 minutes? Come on, let's put that argument to bed, forever. – Levivich 16:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Levivich: By that logic, might as well scrap WP:NFOOTY completely. (And also deletion discussions are not polling booths) --SuperJew (talk) 17:04, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep While his WP:NFOOTY qualification isn't all that much, Lucas at least has a full body of work in the Australian cup along with a decently covered lower league that's second-tier Australian in which he was the top scorer, and being the first player to score multiple hat tricks in the FFA Cup [3]. SportingFlyer T·C 02:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:GNG, and by extension WP:N. Although a number of sources can be found, and some are provided, all the coverage is routine statistical listings. That does not meet the "significant coverage" from "multiple sources" required by GNG. The subject made a single top-level appearance. Technically, the subject meets WP:NFOOTY, but this forms a part of WP:NSPORT, which clearly states that "the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept". Per this discussion, community consensus is that "subject-specific notability guidelines do not supersede the general notability guideline, except in clear cases where GNG does not apply." Harrias ^talk 06:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I have added some content/sources which specifically pertains to the subject.Simione001 (talk) 07:55, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Passes WP:NFOOTY. Simply put. - J man708 (talk) 04:04, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - meets GNG with one, two, and three. Nfitz (talk) 17:08, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like the first two are written by the leagues (not independent), and the third one is a local blog written by self-described "aspiring journalists" (not reliable). I don't think any of those count towards GNG. – Levivich 03:21, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I disagree. Nfitz (talk) 04:22, 1 September 2019 (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.