Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Lichaj

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 no consensus. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Lichaj

PROD was removed for no reason. Hasn't made a professional appearance yet. "He looks to be a part of Villa's plan for the future." is WP:CRYSTAL Spiderone (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Spiderone (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If you use the logic that he hasn't made a first team appearnce yet at a professional level then we should delete all players that haven't done so. Just searching for a few minutes and I find the following players who haven't made a professional appearance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Dos_Santos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Coquelin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Amos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Spearing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Darby

I don't see a Marked for Deletion for these players. That's completely hypocritical. (talk) 6 August 2009 (UTC)

............or alternatively it could just be that people haven't noticed those articles yet. Maybe it would be better to assume good faith rather than slinging insults around -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

.....oh, and Ben Amos has made one professional appearance for Manchester United for starters..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:47, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All those players have played professional football apart from Dos Santos who has since been deleted. Spiderone (talk) 08:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no. Except Ben Amos, NONE of those players have made a professional appearance according to their Wiki page. Notice the 0 appearances for their club. LukeAtmiaz (talk) 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The zero in the infobox means they haven't played in a domestic league match. All of the players with articles you have cited have played in a professional first team match in either the Champions League or the League Cup. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 10:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, Lichaj has only played in the Peace Cup and the reserves. Spiderone (talk) 12:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this player fails both WP:ATHLETE (as he hasn't "competed at the fully professional level of a sport") and WP:GNG (as he hasn't "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"; the media attention so far simply refers to his transfer to Aston Villa). Recreate if & when he meets either of these guidelines in the future. Giant Snowman 09:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article has to be updated, but he played (and got a yellow card) in the final of the Peace Cup,[1] so he has most certainly now played for a top-flight club. I should really just close this AfD now, but I'll leave it open, just to let other people get their opinions out there. -- Mike (Kicking222) 20:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- To be fair, just because you think the article should be kept, that doesn't mean you can take the arbitrary decision to close the AfD when others have !voted to delete -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Uh, yeah... that's why I kept it open. I thought that was obvious. -- Mike (Kicking222) 15:42, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:GNG, I think, see 1, 2, 3 Geregen2 (talk) 22:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep To quote Wikipedia:Notability: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. WP:ATHLETE can be a handy guide, but is not the final word on notability. An athlete becomes notable the same way any other person does, by receiving coverage from reliable, independent news sources, not by where they've played. faithless (^speak) 04:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ATHLETE. The coverage is insubstantial and crystal-ball in nature. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:29, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Individuals are presumed notable if they meet WP:ATHLETE, but may well be notable even if they don't. The subject's reliable and verifiable coverage in independent sources established notability under WP:N. Alansohn (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Fails WP:Bio and WP:Athlete, the Peace Cup is not a major football competition and recieving a yellow card during a game is not really an appropraite article for Wikipedia RM-Taylor (talk) 00:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You don't seem to be familiar with the criteria for speedy deletion. Regardless of whether you think the article should be deleted or kept, it obviously is not a candidate for speedy deletion. Best, faithless (^speak) 04:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom. Why was my vote deleted? Hubschrauber729 (talk) 01:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure but here it is: [2] Spiderone (talk) 08:13, 8 August 2009 (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.