Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seiya Da Costa Lay

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 keep. $Salvio giuliano$ 19:52, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seiya Da Costa Lay

[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)

Does not meet WP:GNG, since the deprecation of NFOOTY, it would need to have in-depth sourcing to show they pass GNG. Has been draftified and recreated in mainspace without enough improvement to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:56, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I found [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], and [11], among many many more Indonesian sources. Clearly significant figure in Indonesian football with ongoing career in fully pro Indonesian top flight and youth international career, both of which receive lots of media coverage. Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 19:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I’m seeing plenty of WP:RS WP:SIGCOV to establish WP:NOTABILITY. I would see the case for deletion if WP:NOTABILITY wasn’t evident in the form of significant coverage by reliable independent sources. However, the available sources and coverage of the subject demonstrate WP:NOTABILITY meeting WP:GNG, so the correct policy-based outcome would be keeping. Shawn Teller (talk) 19:10, 25 March 2023 (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.