Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Román Rubilio Castillo

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. Randykitty (talk) 16:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Román Rubilio Castillo

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested with an unsupported claim to general notability. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 20:03, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 20:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - He hasn't played in a Fully professional league and he doesn't have any senior international caps either therefore he fails WP:NFOOTBALL. IJA (talk) 07:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - After reviewing the comments by other editors here on this AfD, I'm going to say this article just scrapes the standards of WP:GNG due to significant media coverage. IJA (talk) 14:41, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 09:13, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Has played at least 80 professional matches in addition to 5 appearance for U20 national team. Was also top goalscorer for 2013 Apertura while playing for Vida. Chupu (talk) 20:04, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Youth matches are explicitly excluded as a source of notability per WP:NSPORT, and the claim that the Honduran top flight is fully pro is not supported by reliable sources. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:50, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Meets WP:GNG with articles such as [1] and [2] among others. Nfitz (talk) 16:39, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 01:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Chupu and Nfitz and Passes WP:GNG per this [3],[4] ,[5] ,[http://www.laprensa.hn/deportes/760089-410/rubilio-castillo-y-lucas-goméz-quieren-anotarle-a-olimpia .He was the Goleador del Torneo Apertura de Honduras in 2013 in addition to playing for the youth team and plays for the top side in Honduras.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

None of this is significant coverage. The first article is a match preview, the second is transfer speculation, and the third is an injury update, all of which is routine sports journalism insufficient for WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out sorry I did not add the correct link .The 3rd ref does confirm he was the Goleador del Torneo Apertura de Honduras in 2013 . Rubilio, otro goleador “cocotero” de la Liga and this Rubilio: “El liderato de goleo es una motivación extra” and Rubilio Castillo y Lucas Goméz quieren anotarle a Olimpia in addition playing the national youth team in a Nation were Football is the most popular sport do think the subject will pass WP:GNG marginally without going in depth of the coverage in the Honduras or Latin American Media..Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:57, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP: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) 12:14, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 22:11, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The sources listed pass the GNG. Done deal. I admit I don't understand Fenix's take on it: the GNG is an absolute, and there's nothing in it requiring that a subject must pass a subordinate notability criterion in order for sources related to that activity to be considered valid. Nha Trang 22:04, 31 October 2014 (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.