Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Heath (footballer)

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. Missvain (talk) 00:57, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Heath (footballer)

Nick Heath (footballer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

His two minutes of professional football in League Two for Kidderminster means that he technically passes WP:NFOOTBALL. I have struggled to find anything that amounts to WP:GNG coverage and have searched his name in connection with all of the clubs that he has played for in non-league. The coverage is all local and just routine mentions in match reports [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. He appears to now be an U21 coach for Boldmere St. Michaels F.C. as per [7]. There is growing consensus that a borderline NFOOTBALL pass is insufficient when GNG is comprehensively failed.

In terms of WP:ATD, this could be redirected but I'm not sure where. Spiderone 17:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 17:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - agree that failing GNG comprehensively is more important than scraping by on NFOOTBALL. GiantSnowman 19:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A very minor figure who does not really fit on an encyclopaedia covering a broad range of subjects which hopes to avoid overt bias to particular fields or nations. He would have a place on a specialist Fandom site. RobinCarmody (talk) 00:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It ain’t going to make a blind bit of difference what my opinion is, but surely this player playing in the Football League would qualify this item to remain, like millions of others, or have the rules been changed yet again? Skippo10 (talk) 20:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see all of the discussions linked here which all show strong consensus that a technical and trivial passing of NFOOTBALL is not necessarily enough for an article to be kept. There would usually need to be at least a suggestion that the footballer can meet GNG. Spiderone 12:40, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It's better to have a complete set of articles here for WP:NFOOTBALL than maintain a complete set on another site and a separate incomplete set here. Subject-specific guidelines are more important than WP:GNG as a reason to delete an article, there's no reason to say they shouldn't be as a reason to keep an article. Peter James (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the very top of WP:NFOOTBALL, it says This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) is likely to meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article in Wikipedia. NFOOTBALL is merely a guideline to help us decide whether something will pass WP:GNG. If someone comprehensively fails GNG, it's fair to say that scraping by on NFOOTBALL is insufficient. Heath is an amateur footballer who just so happened to play two minutes of a game between two professional teams. Spiderone 18:57, 7 December 2020 (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.