Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midfield quartet

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. Daniel (talk) 03:38, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Midfield quartet

[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)

Contrary to what the article claims, a "midfield quartet" is just the 4 players making up the midfield in e.g. a 4-4-2 or a 5-4-1 (can also be in other sports of course). Which is just a dictionary definition.[1] No reason to create a novel definition for something rather mundane. Fram (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not just the 4 players making up the midfield, midfield quartet article should be understood in the context of the Golden generation article

No, you claim that the term "midfield quartet" is used for an exceptional quartet, while in reality it is used for any such quartet. A "golden generation", on the other hand, is by definition an exceptional group (though, as with most such terms, it gets used way too often). It's not as if anyone is ever going to say "My God, these aren't just four midfield players, they are a midfield quartet!" or anything similar. Fram (talk) 14:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK I made a mistake about article name, I changed the article name to golden quartet and cited new sources. Thanks for your advice. Footwiks (talk)

You shouldn't move articles in the midst of an AfD, and you should be a lot more careful when sourcing stuff: your first source for the "golden quartet" of Zico, Socrates et al. mentions both "golden quartet" and "Zico", but isn't about this golden quartet[2], while your second source for the same supposed golden quartet doesn't use the term "golden quartet"[3]. And "golden quartet" isn't linked to football especially, every group of 4 people who together are seen as exceptional can be labeled "golden quartet", just like there are "golden trio's" and so on (e.g. for football, the golden trio Messi, Xavi and Iniesta is a much more common term than these golden quartets). Fram (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - even with the name change, this feels like a WP:NEOLOGISM that is only used in passing in a couple of articles, it doesn't warrant an article Dexxtrall (talk) 16:00, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to BBC News article. Reliable source - BBC used golden quartet in 2003. I don' think that this term is NEOLOGISM.Footwiks (talk) 16:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete clearly not a notable concept. SportingFlyer T·C 17:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:53, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I have reverted the undiscussed move by @Footwiks:, which happened after the AFD was opened. If it happens again I will block Footwiks. Giant Snowman 19:42, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as above, not needed. Giant Snowman 19:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:50, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete just a dictionary definition for using 4 midfielders. Not any thing here worth merging into the midfielder article. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The whole article seems pointless and trivial, WP:OR ? I agree with the main AfD assessment by Fram for deletion. Govvy (talk) 11:59, 25 June 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.