Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohamed El Maghraby

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. and I don't think an additional relist will provide one. We have the uncertainty around athletes coupled with a language barrier in source access and established editors looking at it from both sides. Perhaps if his career does not progress and/or guidelines stabilize, this can be revisited down the line but at the moment there is not a consensus to delete or draftify Star Mississippi 02:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed El Maghraby[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)

Subject fails WP:SPORTCRIT due to lack of significant coverage. A search per WP:BEFORE did not turn up any significant coverage. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Egypt. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Please retract nomination, player is clearly notable - multiple sources exist if you use his Arabic-translated name on Google. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 22:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the excellent sourcing and expansion done by David. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets GNG following article improvement. Yet another example of nominator not following BEFORE. Giant Snowman 11:56, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Biography of a living person about a 21-year-old who's been playing professional football for about four months, and who according to the sources will struggle against fully professional players.—S Marshall T/C 12:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And, the direct attack on the nominator above, is characteristic of this topic area. Football-interested editors have normalized this kind of behaviour through constant repetition and don't see anything wrong with it. In this case, the nominator is viciously lambasted for missing a search string in an unfamiliar alphabet.—S Marshall T/C 12:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It doesn’t matter whether he’d struggle against pro players, the point is that El Maghrabi has played professional football, and has sources to back this up. He passes GNG, having two+ independent articles written on him, and passes NFOOTY too, having played for a fully pro team against another fully pro team in a competitive fixture.

The nominator was not “viciously lambasted”, they just claimed to have looked for sources, yet didn’t use the (readily available) Arabic translation of the players name. Considering he was playing in a country where Arabic is a main language, the criticism is valid.

I fear you are not looking at this nomination objectively, and clearly hold a grudge against football-related articles/editors, and I ask you civilly to approach football AfDs impartially in future. Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 12:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And, oh look, now that I've !voted "delete" I'm told that not objective or impartial and I'm only here because I have grudge against football.—S Marshall T/C 13:44, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes... because you have not been objective or impartial. The objective way to approach an AfD is to start with the question "Is the subject matter of this article notable?" In this case, El Maghrabi is notable, as has been shown after article improvement. Rather, you have approached the AfD (for whatever reason) with your first concern being that the article in question is about a footballer. The timeframe of the players' professional career is completely irrelevant, so I'm not sure why this was noted by yourself, and to then go on a tirade against NFOOTY and its members is very childish. Please can you justify your reasoning for the !delete vote, without bringing the entire community into the argument? Davidlofgren1996 (talk) 14:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep clearly passes GNG and BEFORE, terrible nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A review of the sources makes clear that what's available is either routine game/player acquisition coverage or coverage that's mostly about the team or team management. A handful of blurbs that are a few paragraphs long simply don't confer notability. This is not a "terrible nom" just because this person has been mentioned a few times in Arabic news sources. agtx 17:38, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify Editors should note that NFOOTY has been deprecated so playing for a fully pro team against another fully pro team has no bearings on his notability. The only thing that matters is if he has WP:SIGCOV or not. While it might be debatable whether the sources are WP:SIGCOV, I do note that they all seem to be from a span of 20 days in February 2022, which is a relitively short time period. Per WP:SUSTAINED, Notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time. In my opinion the player has only recieved a brief bursts of news coverage and thus fails WP:GNG. He does though have an active career and a decent possibility to gain further coverage so I think the best course of action would be to draftify the article. Alvaldi (talk) 20:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I personally see enough coverage to justify WP:GNG, which is all that matters. --Angelo (talk) 07:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It has been established that there are several sources in Arabic covering the subject. No detailed argument as to the depth of coverage in each of them has been presented.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Modussiccandi (talk) 07:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article has been significantly improved with extensiving sourcing, per WP:HEY, that meets not only WP:SPORTCRIT but WP:GNG. I'm not sure what further @Modussiccandi: is looking for. It's most certainly not routine transfer coverage, which would be a mention, a sentence, or a list. There's full article here. Nfitz (talk) 21:52, 10 May 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.