Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Younis (2nd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 23:20, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Younis

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Recreated shortly after previous AfD deletion without addressing any of the issues. My own WP:BEFORE does not find any sources compliant with WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC, both of which require significant coverage to come from sources that are completely independent of Younis. Searches will likely yield Football Talent Scout, which appears to be a decent source at first glance but fails WP:RS requirements as the article is written by a guest account, so is no more reliable than Wikipedia itself or any other WP:UGC.

Source analysis to follow. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:50, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://wswanderersfc.com.au/squads/adra6wrtnrz7de6pmaf1ugm50?slug=adra6wrtnrz7de6pmaf1ugm50&competition=300ig4lfofmkh3u971h34pbf8&teams=6h553bwfqkoxayuv80uikkn42&selected=MEN	This is his employer		This is just a profile page on his own club website	✘ No
https://wswanderersfc.com.au/news/younis-meteoric-rise	This is his employer		Contains detail about him but the source is not independent of him at all	✘ No
https://mens.nplnsw.com.au/2022/12/17/western-sydney-wanderers-ready-for-the-big-league/	per SPORTBASIC "Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players."		Mentioned twice	✘ No
https://keepup.com.au/a-league-men/fixtures/western-sydney-wanderers-vs-melbourne-city-15-01-2023/			Mentioned twice	✘ No
https://wswanderersfc.com.au/news/younis-pens-two-year-scholarship-deal	This is his employer		A basic contract renewal announcement with some quotes	✘ No
https://www.footballaustralia.com.au/news/australian-u-18-squad-face-some-europes-best	per SPORTBASIC "Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players."		Mentioned once	✘ No
https://www.fpf.pt/pt/News/Todas-as-not%C3%ADcias/Not%C3%ADcia/news/40386/contextid/182			Mentioned in the squad list and yellow card confirmed. At no point is Younis addressed in detail.	✘ No
https://aleagues.com.au/news/australia-a-leagues-socceroos-england-football-news/	Probably debatable as to whether this is independent or not but I'll give benefit of the doubt. The coverage is trivial anyway.		Mentioned only 3 times inside the match report	✘ No
https://www.socceroos.com.au/news/subway-young-socceroos-squad-named-marbella-week-football	per SPORTBASIC "Team sites and governing sports bodies are not considered independent of their players."		Squad listing only	✘ No
https://footballtalentscout.net/2023/03/01/marcus-younis-australias-rising-star-by-jake-mcghee/		Written by a guest account. Anyone can write an article on Football Talent Scout.	More than a trivial mention of him	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Delete and SALT - per last AFD, what has changed? Giant Snowman 18:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:18, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per source assessment, I couldn't find anything else. NotAGenious (talk) 16:37, 18 October 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.