Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dahlia Salah

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. Tone 20:03, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dahlia Salah

[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)

Lacks the notability required to have an article. While she meets the very lax indicators of WP:NFOOTY by having played for a national team, NFOOTY / NSPORTS explicitly state that they only give a presumption of notability, and that in the end WP:GNG must be met. The only non-database source whioh gives some attention to her is an interview by the Gibraltar FA, which isn't an independent source of course. Fram (talk) 10:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 10:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 10:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 10:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:47, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is longstanding consensus that scraping by on NFOOTBALL with one or two appearances is insufficient when GNG is failed so comprehensively, as is the case here. International players are usually assumed to be more notable than club players, as it is a higher level, but the article says she has stopped playing to study? If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 21:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Just found via digging on FA Full-Time that she is currently on the books of QPR, albeit in their reserve side at the 8th level of the pyramid. Though it's not an ideal level, it still shows she's playing. VampireKilla (talk) 00:26, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per consensus at similar women's football AfDs such as Linda Oe, Victoria Balomenos and Tessy Bamberg-Schitter. Having full international caps is certainly a notable achievement (playing at the highest level) and warrants a stand-alone article. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Spiderone has played for a National team at International level.Further subject is 20 years old and actively playing.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- So no evidence at all of meeting WP:GNG, just the same tired Sports SNG arguments which lead to people wanting to abolish it all together, and which people at the related discussion claim are not made and everybody knows that meeting NSPORTS without meeting GNG is of course not sufficient... Fram (talk) 09:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She clearly does not have the sourcing to pass GNG. She plays for the team of a Gibraltar. Let us not abuse the term "national team", and treat a team that looses to Liechstenstein like it is the same as one that is competitive against Brazil. We need to be logical in how we apply criteria, and if we start treating every member of every "national" team of a micro-state or a dinky overseas territory of another country as default notable the results will be absurd. If one of these "national" teams actually wins several international games, and maybe even is a contender in the world cup it will make sense, but acting like the team for a place with a population of 34,000 and an area of 2.6 square miles is in any sense a "national" team, especially when the place is an overseas dependency, is just not a realistic assessment of the situation involved. She is young, and so may well at some point play at a level that generates significant coverage, but we do not know that, we cannot predict the future, and we do not create articles until the coverage has actually come to be, not just because we think coverage likely.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I disagree with the above notion that smaller national teams are less important than larger ones, she plays in the same qualifiers as other international players. Passes GNG, and presumably GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- She only played in a friendly, not even in a qualifier. And being one of the 11 (plus substitutes) best players at any given time is somewhat easier in a "country" of 32,000 people than in a country of millions of course. National teams like the one from Gibraltar have never come close to winning anything or to qualifying for any tournament, the players in the team are usually not important otherwise (don't play at a high level), and most importantly they don't get the coverage needed for an article. Fram (talk) 08:11, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fram's and JPL's rationales are spot-on. Meeting NFOOTY is irrelevant if GNG is failed, and no one has produced evidence of SIGCOV. There is far more precedent supporting deletion of SSG-meeting, GNG-failing footballers than the three AfDs cited in support of keeping. JoelleJay (talk) 18:43, 28 January 2022 (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.