Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Cook (footballer, born 1885)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2022 January 19.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Fenix down (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

James Cook (footballer, born 1885)

[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)

Fails GNG ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 15:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:56, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets NFOOTBALL with multiple appearances in WP:FPL. Needs improving, not deleting. Giant Snowman 16:20, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I can understand the assessment for this AfD, however this player was around when the Scottish league was fully pro. When there are eight games he played for Grimsby when they were in the league, well that clearly shows he more than easily passes WP:NFOOTBALL. I am sure there is more to find to improve the article if people go looking. Govvy (talk) 11:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep'. Meets NFOOTY with professional appearances.--Mvqr (talk) 11:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no WP:SIGCOV shown, non-notable footballer. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant coverage, fails WP:GNG. Even if NFOOTY might be met, per WP:SNG, articles which pass an SNG or the GNG may still be deleted or merged into another article, especially if adequate sourcing or significant coverage cannot be found. Pilaz (talk) 18:02, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I suppose this is him, mentioned as emigrating to Chicago. I also found some traces in local papers at the BNA, but they all just said 'Grimsby sign winger from Kilbirnie called James Cook' - that was pretty much it. His absence from An Alphabet of the Celts means we can be reasonably certain he never appeared in a first team match for Celtic in the league or cup. So we're a distance short of WP:GNG. In terms of WP:NFOOTBALL, it's frustrating to see false claims that the Football Leagues in England and Scotland were "fully professional" back then. Emphatically, they were not. The facts are well established and it's bordering on disingenuous and/or tendentious editing to keep lying about it in these discussions. This guy's trajectory (Greenock, Grimsby, Plymouth, Hull) says to me he had some sort of maritime occupation and played semi-pro soccer in his spare time: not notable. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 11:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are lots of early players missing from the Celtic records. Andrew Watson (footballer, born 1856) Is a good example of lots of material about his history found later a long time after his death. I can't see how this can't be done with this player. It's not just about web searches, but actually going to find material in those places where he played. Just because you can't see something, doesn't mean it isn't there to find. Govvy (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, Govvy, I find that a fanciful proposition because there seem to be very detailed records of Celtic's matches from that season. I mean, IF somebody did take it upon themselves to do that sort of original research, found some level of coverage that had somehow eluded everyone else, then got it published in a reliable source, then it might have some bearing here. Until then it's just speculation. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 17:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very detailed? The Celtic Wiki not only fails RS, but isn't detailed what so ever! In fact it missing a lot of information. 1900–01 Celtic F.C. season Has more info. :/ You really do bemuse me at times. Govvy (talk) 10:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They've got line-ups for every game that season, Govvy, backed in most cases by contemporary newspaper reports. They even list a friendly against Motherwell with all trialists and their Junior clubs named! On other pages they list club historians Pat Woods, David Potter, Tom Campbell etc. etc. fellas who've churned out books after books covering all this stuff in forensic detail. Anyway, there's only me and Nfitz who have bothered to look for any sources at all on this guy. Everyone else has made a lazy gesture towards WP:MUSTBESOURCES, based on a false idea that the article meets WP:NFOOTBALL. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Given that he was only at Celtic (according to the article) for months during 1900 - at the age of 15, then presumably this was more of an academy thing. His professional appearances are when he was in his 20s. Bit of a red herring. Great find Daz. With that, I can located his 1971 obituary in the Chicago Tribune - which is an short article in itself, unlike most of those who died that day. Nfitz (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look I do think it's very interesting (and respect to you Nfitz for actually finding some sources). But we're well into WP:OR territory here, using this sort of triangulation to cobble together a functional article out of scraps which fall well short of WP:SIGCOV. The 'news piece' in the Scottish Referee is 67 words long. Does no-one think it's curious that the guy's own obituary doesn't even mention his allegedly notable football career? Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 18:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:NFOOTBALL. Lack of online sources is not enough to delete a footballer with professional appearances. --Assyrtiko (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete as Nominator~~ Fails GNG with nearly zero sources as stated above. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 14:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't really need to add a delete !vote if you are the nominator, that's assumed from the fact that you nominated it....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:57, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes NFOOTY.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above, meeting NFOOTY. Also, seems to be a news piece about him on page 6 of the 30 August 1909 edition of the Scottish Referee according to the British Newspaper Archive. Does anyone have access? Nfitz (talk) 00:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: 15 pro appearances is considerable enough that sources probably exist. Curbon7 (talk) 06:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NFOOTY.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:29, 18 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.