Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Juncaj

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Juncaj[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 due to lack of significant coverage. Of the sources in the article, [1],[2][3] are WP:PRIMARY sources, [4][5][6][7] are trivial mentions, [8] is a blog, [9] is PRIMARY with just quotes from the subject, [10] is a match report, [11] is a routine transfer report, [12] is a database source and [13] looks like a automatic compilation from a database that is part of massive amount of similar articles on the same site[14]. I was unable to find better sources during a search. Alvaldi (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Alvaldi (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], and [20] among more sources, all go into his background. Young player with ongoing career in fully pro Slovenian top flight (already 2+ games), which also receives coverage. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 07:22, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Das osmnezz These are the same sources as I covered above. [21] is a WP:PRIMARY source from the Football Association of Slovenia, [22] is a primary source from the National Premier Soccer League, [23] is a blog (from about Duchy of Taco is my eclectic personal blog project), [24] is a routine transfer report, [25] trivially mentions him as the son of George Juncaj, [26] has a trivial mention of him. Playing in a notable league does not make you notable as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Being young with an ongoing professional career does not make you notable per WP:NSPORTS. Getting only mentions in primary sources or trivial mentions in secondary sources does not make you notable per WP:GNG. All this you know very well, yet you continue to use the same faulty arguments and post the same low level of sources in every other football AfD there is. Alvaldi (talk) 08:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:55, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 10:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, navijaskacona.si and npsl.com aren't PRIMARY sources since they aren't his direct employers, ie the clubs. Passes GNG IMO with significant coverage, although page could probably spruced up like any other.--Ortizesp (talk) 06:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, a league that has a direct interest in promoting teams and players within its ranks is never, ever an independent source. Alvaldi (talk) 09:17, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Alvaldi gives a very thorough summary of the source deficiencies, including the obvious fact that governing sports orgs are not independent of players. And as always, Das osmnezz's refbombing with useless links is disruptive. JoelleJay (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lack of non-primary sources to justify WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the two Detroit News sources have slightly more than trivial mentions but are probably borderline WP:SIGCOV at best (and as they are from the same publication would only count as a single source for the purposes of WP:GNG). Everything else appears to be trivial mentions, providing more coverage of Juncaj's father, or WP:PRIMARY sources. Frank Anchor 14:42, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Article fails WP:GNG; the only independent, reliable sources are trivial/routine coverage like the signing announcement from sio1.net. There is simply no in-depth coverage available online. Jogurney (talk) 14:23, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom's source eval. BLPs need clearly IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notabilty to avoid abuse. // Timothy :: talk 14:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Montenegro and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:13, 29 March 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.