Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axel Tuanzebe

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. MBisanz talk 00:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Axel Tuanzebe

Axel Tuanzebe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Original PROD was removed without any explanation via an edit summary, but the user (User:Anishchand99) did claim on my talk page "You know he is certain to make his preseason debut and he will 100% get his senior debut in the league and if not then at least in the europa or the league cup." Obviously this is a violation of WP:CRYSTAL, and this article should be deleted ASAP. – PeeJay 15:56, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions (done by User:PeeJay2K3). Qed237 (talk) 16:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Daily Star - Firstly these are comments relating a pre-season game and long standing consensus is that pre-season appearances in friendly matches are insufficient for notability. Secondly, this is about as far from in depth coverage as is possible - 90 words on an 8 minute substitute appearance.
  2. Mirror - I would question whether NFitz or Naz actually read any of the links they found as this is exactly the same quote from Mourinho as used in the previous link, with nothing additional added. There is nothing here to support GNG at all and the article actually devotes the majority of its very short length to a totally different player.
  3. Mirror 2 - This goes a little way to establishing GNG, but essentially regurgitates an MUTV interview. This is hardly independent coverage, but could be useful if additional sources were provided.
  4. IBT - Again, calls into question whether NFitz or Naz read the sources. Quotes such as Criticism is as good as praise really as it allows you to work on something you're not as good at. There's nothing wrong with criticism, you just take everything in your stride in this and the previous source clearly indicate that both sources are merely regurgitating the same primary source interview from Manchester United's own in-house television channel.
Basically, this is a player who has just made a very short substitute appearance for a notable team. He will probably become notable in the future, but a handful of sources duplicating a single brief quote from his manager plus a couple of older "interviews" which merely repeat primary sources. Fenix down (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This person fails WP:NFOOTBALL. As far as I can tell, he hasn't played in any fully-professional league, and I couldn't find a lot of coverage overall. Probably WP:TOOSOON for an article here, perhaps he'll be notable enough in a couple of years. Omni Flames (talk) 08:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I provided above two references from in-depth articles last year that meet WP:GNG (I never said the two recent ones met WP:GNG). These were [5] and [6]. If I understand the concern with them, is that while one does demonstrate WP:GNG the second is derivative of the firet. Okay then, here are two more articles that are unrelated to the original two. [7] and [8]; two different writers, two different countries. These are examples of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. WP:GNG is met. The failure to meet WP:NFOOTBALL is not relevant. Nfitz (talk) 03:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, but think about it - in 50 years, if this guy has never played a professional game in his life, do you think those sources you provided will still assert notability? Sources that indicate someone might have a promising future aren't exactly strong in my book. They'd be fine as sources for a section on his early career once his notability has actually been established, but not for establishing notability in the first place. – PeeJay 07:37, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to PeeJay's comments, I am still seeing problems with the sources that you are bringing here, as they are essentially still to a greater or lesser extent mirrors not only of other sources you have already provided, but also derivative of primary source interviews and so not suitable for GNG, specifically:
  1. Mirror - large parts of this, specifically quotes from his old P.E. teacher, then quotes from the current school sports coordinator, are repeated verbatim from the earlier Mirror article you cited. Bar a few additional quotes, the June 2016 Mirror article is basically a slight expansion of the same thing they wrote in November 2015, which you already cited above.
  2. Sportskeeda - firstly, I would call into question the reliability of this website. Not that it should not be used, but given that pages like this suggest that anyone can submit work, this seems very much like a user-generated news site. Secondly, the major quotes in this article are again regurgitated. The Mourinho quote is exactly the same as the one noted in the very brief Mirror article you linked to earlier, with the Paul McGuinness quote being essentially the same as the second Mirror article.
As far as I can see, there are some quotes from people at Manchester United who naturally would have a good opinion of him and these have been rehashed several times over the last six months to produce several articles. What I am not seeing is significant in depth coverage that does not rely on Primary sources for its content. The reason I am not seeing this is that this individual has made an 8 minute appearance in a pre-season friendly, he has done nothing yet in his field to be considered notable. Fenix down (talk) 07:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It is seeming to me that there is a hare and a tortoise situation here. The hare is for "delete", to be making a WP:POINT perhaps? But the tortoise is not so much being for "keep" as for wait. Seeing the comments being made publicly by Jose Mourinho, it must be possible and even that likely that Tuanzebe will be playing in the FA Community Shield on 7 August, only three weeks time. Surely in case like this one, it is better using some WP:COMMONSENSE and waiting until, let us be saying, the end of August? The player then being indeed part of Mourinho's plans, we will surely be seeing him in first team in August. Can the deletion request not be deferred until then, otherwise it being recreated only three or four weeks after being deleted? Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 13:16, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is absolutely nothing POINTy about this nomination. I ask you, how long should we wait before Tuanzebe becomes notable? Just until the Community Shield? What if he doesn't play in that; should we continue waiting? The fact is, he's not notable right now and shouldn't have an article until he is. After all, there's nothing to stop us restoring this article once he makes a noteworthy appearance, he just shouldn't have one right now... – PeeJay 13:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, this is not pointy, we simply don't make articles about any subject in anticipation of notability. Once he actually plays senior football he will be notable. If the result of this AfD is to delete, I am happy for you or any other editor to notify me when they believe he is notable and I will restore the article to mainspace immediately. Fenix down (talk) 14:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Fenix down. That is fair enough. Thank you. Regards, Naz | talk | contribs 14:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Not that playing in tomorrow's friendly would confer notability, but Jose Mourinho just announced that Eric Bailly and Phil Jones will be United's starting centre-backs against Dortmund, so it seems like Tuanzebe is still further away from the starting XI than we thought. Plus, even if he does start any of the friendlies this summer, Mourinho seems to want to try all sorts of defensive combinations, so I wouldn't read anything into who plays on the tour and who doesn't. – PeeJay 14:31, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails WP:NFOOTY and WP:GNG. A lot of the above arguments are very WP:CRYSTAL. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 02:00, 24 July 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Axel_Tuanzebe&oldid=1171391620"