Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kei Uchiyama

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 keep. Fenix down (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kei Uchiyama[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)

Has only played eight games since starting professional career which means it fails WP:NFOOTBALL. It also cites only one source and of course is a stub. –Cupper52^Discuss! 14:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. –Cupper52^Discuss! 14:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. –Cupper52^Discuss! 14:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. –Cupper52^Discuss! 14:26, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Kei has 34 appearances according to Soccerway in a WP:FPL and passes WP:NFOOTBALL. Nominator should have checked the one source and updated the article rather than nominating it for deletion. Dougal18 (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 17:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 17:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - 34 appearances (and counting!) in a WP:FPL - clearly meets WP:NFOOTBALL. Article needs improving, not deleting. Nominator has clearly not complied with WP:BEFORE. Giant Snowman 17:12, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In regards to both keep !votes: WP:FPL is not a guideline or policy on Wikipedia. It can not be used to validate or discredit a subject's inclusion. WP:NFOOTBALL is an SNG that can be used to presume notability for article creation. However, the article must still face the same scrutiny as all other articles to maintain inclusion when brought be fore an AfD. NFOOTBALL can not be the sole deciding factor in this case. Does the subject meet the basic requirements by our notability guideline found under WP:N. Does the subject receive "significant coverage in reliable and independent sources"? If the answer is yes then the article must be kept. If the answer is no then the presumed notability by the SNG (NFOOTBALL) is rebutted and the article should be removed not matter how many professional games they have played in or what league they belong in. GiantSnowman is correct that a WP:BEFORE search is expected of anyone who nominates and !votes on an AFD. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 17:48, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Even if it is eight appearances at the top level league, that clearly makes the player notable. Doesnt seems like a failure of WP:NFOOTBALL Kashmorwiki (talk) 18:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Conducted a WP:BEFORE search and can only find player profiles and game stats. This may add to notability, once established, but does not constitute "significant coverage in reliabel and independent sources" therefore the subject fails notability as per WP:N. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 18:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - does clearly meet WP:NFOOTBALL with 34 appearances in J3. Page could do with expanding, but there isn't always substantial info to be added with pages such as these - of which there are thousands. Here is a little interview, though the source isn't one I'm familiar with, and here is another article about him. Though there isn't much to write about to expand the article, I will add a little detail now. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 21:13, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neither is considered a reliable secondary source. Interviews are considered primary. None confer notability based on Wikipedia's notability guideline. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 21:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, and I know this may be a bit WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but there are literally thousands of football articles out there for players who meet WP:NFOOTY but not WP:GNG. I think the community is very strong in it's support for these kinds of pages. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, don't let me catch any of you commenting on other articles citing the criteria of WP:GNG or WP:N as a reason for deletion then. WP:NOT Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. ;-) --ARoseWolf (Talk) 21:40, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - strong consensus that a strong NFOOTBALL pass is enough for the article to be kept; I see no reason for this one to go against consensus Spiderone 12:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the only Internet sources which are available about this player are statistical databases. Jnovikov (what things?) 21:36, 16 January 2021 (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.