Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rudy Valencia

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 Rudy Valencia and Adán Reyes, keep Cesar Acevedo. JohnCD (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rudy Valencia

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested by the article's creator without providing a reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following articles for the same reason. Sir Sputnik (talk) 07:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 07:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - no evidence of notability, all fail WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 12:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete all~~ Delete all bar Acevedo - Fails WP:NFOOTY as has not played in a fully professional league nor played senior international football. No indication of GNG pass based on any other activities within or outside football. Fenix down (talk) 14:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC) - Comment - have updated view on Acevedo based on comments below. Fenix down (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What am I missing here? CD Aguilla are a frequent CONCACAF Champions League participant, which I thought was restricted to professional teams. The discussion here in Canada about letting teams lower than NASL into the Canadian Championship is that not being fully professional, they couldn't play in Champions League if they were to win the competition. Nfitz (talk) 02:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What you're missing is reliable sources confirming that the Salvadoran top flight is fully pro, if that is in fact the case. The CONCACAF Champions League might very well be, but some of its feeder leagues definitely are not, and it's the professional status of the league in which a club plays, not of the club itself, that determines whether its players meet WP:NSPORT or not. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Digging a bit more, it appears some teams that play in Champions League are in leagues that aren't fully professional - Real Estelli for example. Though I'm not aware of any non-professional team playing. But I'm still not seeing any evidence that the Ecuadoran league isn't fully professional. But if someone has some evidence, I'll gladly drop it. Nfitz (talk) 02:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:32, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:32, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Nfitz: - as has been noted at other AfDs recently that you have been involved in, the burden is on you. The current consensus, about which you are well aware, is that WP:FPL is what is used to confirm fully professional leagues. As such it is by definition current consensus that leagues are not fully professional until they are on that list. If you have evidence that the Ecuadorean league is fully professional, please present it in the correct place (i.e. WT:FOOTY). The existence of WP:FPL demonstrably indicates that the need is to provide evidence a league is fully professional before it is considered so, NOT to consider all leagues fully professional until evidence is provided that they are not. Fenix down (talk) 08:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Fenix down: And yet I can't find any discussion where consensus has been found that this league is not fully professional. Please point to the discussion that I have not found. Nfitz (talk) 00:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Nfitz:. Did you read what I wrote at all?!? The league is not on WP:FPL, so the consensus is it is not fully professional. It is as simple as that. FPLs are established on an inclusive basis, not exclusive; i.e. you have to indicate through reliable sources that a league is FPL. This is because it is much harder to prove a negative. By your argument there has been no discussion that the Cook Islands Round Cup, the Palau Soccer League or the Martian Premier Division are not Fully Professional so we should include articles on every player until someone proves they are not. Such an argument is patently nonsensical. It has been made abundantly clear to you in various AfDs over the last few weeks what the current consensus around notability criteria for footballers is and I am finding it increasingly difficult to understaand how you fail to comprehend this. Fenix down (talk) 08:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Fenix down:. Did you read what I wrote at all?!? The league is not on WP:FPL, so there is no consensus. Top level leagues where there is consensus that they aren't fully professional are listed there. Top level leauges where there is consensus that they are fully professional are listed there. However the La Primera División de Fútbol Profesional de El Salvador isn't listed in either place, nor is there any serious discussion I've found on the subject. You might have been able to claim that there's no consensus that they are fully professional, but to claim that there is consensus that they aren't fully professional is false. We're clearly not talking Cook Islands here. I'm sure like many of us you've watched El Salvador teams play in the Champions League, and the level of play is similar to Honduras, where there is consensus they are fully professional. Costa Rica, Panama, and Guatamala possibly too ... but obviously not Nicaragua and Belize. I'm not saying they are fully professional, but if they aren't, they must be close, simply based on their results against other fully professional squads. However, there should be some references found. Nfitz (talk) 14:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~*Delete all~~ *Delete Reyes - Reyes fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL but keep Cesar Acevedo. JMHamo (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Acevedo since he played for the El Salvador national team and meets NFOOTBALL (I added sources to document at least one FIFA World Cup qualifying appearance), but Delete Valencia and Reyes since all of the coverage I've found in reliable sources is routine transfer/signing type coverage or match reports that simply list the player's name or an entry in a football statistics database. Acevedo will likely meet the GNG as well since there are several articles discussing his recent managerial career and some information about his playing time with FAS. Jogurney (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Avecedo - As nominator. Jogurney's research show's that the article is clearly notable. The other two should still go though. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:04, 11 February 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.