Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Engerman

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. The community came to a consensus in March that international and professional caps alone do not confer notability and WP:NFOOTY was deprecated. Based on that, I disregarded the comment by Das osmnezz and Rylesbourne, which attempts to LOCALCONSENSUS around the community's decision. I also disregarded the comment from NemesisAT, which does not attempt to advance an argument as to how Engerman is notable, and gave less weight to Fats40boy11, who falls into the trap of SOURCESEXIST. Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 08:56, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

John Engerman[edit]

[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 WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV. HeinzMaster (talk) 22:18, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Caribbean. HeinzMaster (talk) 22:18, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep User has nominated ~25 articles for deletion in ~20 minutes. Imposisble that a WP:BEFORE was done for each, and the nominations appear to be in bad faith. NemesisAT (talk) 22:47, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:18, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep The article itself needs significant improvement, but there are some sources out there regarding Engerman. An improvement tag would be more sufficient. Fats40boy11 (talk) 08:15, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 15:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We cannot "speed keep" an article just because it was nominated too fast. Speedy keep is for articles that there is no grounds at all to ever consider nomination. We might procedurally keep an article in the case of too fast a nomination. However since we can keep extending the deadline, and we do not need to rule on a nomination the same as a similar one made about the same time, there is no real procedural grounds. What we need is to find sources that are reliable, secondary, in-depth and independent of the subject. I am going to hold off on voting until there is more time for those who thing this article should be kept to find such sources and tell them about them here, and also hopefully if they find such sources they will add them to the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per NemesisAT and Fats40boy11. In addition, he is a international capped player with an ongoing career. I look at the other sports WikiProjects and they don't nearly have an article deleted per day, let alone 30. Article may need improvement, but definitely not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 21:04, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 19:03, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, meets GNG for playing for a national team. Rylesbourne (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't make sense, GNG is based on significant coverage not what team they've played for. –dlthewave ☎ 03:19, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No evidence of significant coverage as required by NSPORTS and GNG. –dlthewave ☎ 03:24, 8 August 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.