Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Besim Tafilaj

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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 16:34, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Besim Tafilaj (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)

I cannot find any evidence of notability. Appears to have played a very small number of professional games and this has generated zero news coverage. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kosovo-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment He seems to have spent almost his entire career in Kosovo where he won multiple championships and cup titles. If there are sources about him they will most likely be in the Kosovo national media which is probably in Albanian, rather than in the english speaking media. To prevent WP:BIAS, I'd recommend a search in Kosovan sources as a part of WP:Before. - Alvaldi (talk) 23:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - a simple Google search[1] in the Albanian edition is returning more results about another individual businessman with the same name. Any editor with the knowledge of Albanian language can help in this. KartikeyaS343 (talk) 06:39, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No notability. Short of a Hey, with three editors unable to find reliable sources according to policies and guidelines, and a BLP tag since 2009, this would be the defining of WP:NOTSTATS. Otr500 (talk)

  Additional comments: Some things just don't make sense. The article has had 129 page views in the last 30 days with 43 revisions and 33 editors since 2008. "Maybe there was hopes the subject would be more notable in time". For the record, keeping an article around, lacking appropriate sourcing, in such hopes is against more than one policy and guideline. While it would be nice to also hope someone with knowledge of "Kosovan sources" (and language) happens along we are not required to search out every nook and cranny looking for needles in a haystack. A minimum search (D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability) is all that is "required". Of course, we could also wait 5 or 6 more years in hopes a future editor was born and will "find the sources" (part of policy on verification and "Responsibility for providing citations") one day. If at that time it became evident there was only mundane sports reporting we could come back to AFD, but that may still not guarantee inclusion. Sourcing (or lack thereof) on an article for content or notability become more crucial when challenged. To stem systemic bias we could learn the language first. A better "suggestion" would be to source a BLP related article from the point of creation. If the person dies after creation it is still a better sourced article. If that is not done and a review (many years later even if at AFD) shows zero sourcing improvements, the subject likely was not notable at the time of such creation and more than likely does not deserve a stand alone article. Of course, if Simple English Wikipedia (listed as "detracting from the raw information standpoint") is going to replace Wikipedia in search results we could throw all sourcing requirements out and "just include everything" to show Wikipedia is still growing and worthy of searching --- We could keep our "higher standards" (sourcing defines notability) or be just like everyone else. Otr500 (talk) 10:08, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I see no improvements since my last comment on this Afd plus I agree with Otr500 on this. KartikeyaS (talk) 17:07, 12 March 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.