Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Micah Lea'alafa

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. joe decker ^talk 02:57, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Micah Lea'alafa

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

He has not played a professional senior game at club or international level. Article fails WP:NFOOTBALL. Also fails WP:GNG. Simione001 (talk) 04:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 12:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 12:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 12:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - He has not played in a fully pro league or received significant coverage, meaning the article fails WP:NSPORT and WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Subject has played for Solomon Islands National Team in Olympic Football qualifier and also per this and this Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 00:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - This is not enough to pass WP:NFOOTBALL, has to play at the olympic games, qualifier does not suffice. Article also fails WP:GNG, not enough mention of the subject. Simione001 (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Question This proposed deletion raises a question in my mind. If you are a member of the Solomon Islands national football team, I woud suggest you are significant in the Soloman's. Given that the Solomon's only have a population of 600,000 there are unlikely to be many who would be considered significant on an international basis, therefore, does this mean that we through our policy are actively discriminating against small (low population) countries and should this issue be looked at further? Even the project page for the Solomon Islands only list 4 participants and they aren't linked to this AfD NealeFamily (talk) 23:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Response - I don't understand how this is discriminatory. In my opinion there hasn't been enough coverage in the media to pass WP:GNG and he also fails WP:NFOOTBALL as he hasnt played for the senior national team or in a full pro league therefore i have nominated it for deletion. This article is being judged with the same criteria as any other article would be. Simione001 (talk) 23:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Isn't the Auckland team a professional team? NealeFamily (talk) 00:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, semi-pro. Simione001 (talk) 01:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 21:43, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as fails notability criteria, also may be to soon judging by comments in local press. NealeFamily (talk) 22:40, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails NFOOTY as has not played senior international football nor played in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 13:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 20:43, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Tier 1 matches are between senior national teams. Since FIFA restricts the Men's Olympic Tournament to a U-23 squad, the qualifiers are not considered Tier 1 matches. WP:NFOOTY specifically includes an exception for the Olympic tournament itself, but not for qualifiers. Fails NFOOTY and WP:GNG. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 01:36, 5 December 2015 (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.