Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Griffith Vaissaire

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:58, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Griffith Vaissaire

Griffith Vaissaire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails

Avilich (talk) 15:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Source 1 seems to be a translation of the 2nd (or the other way around), and neither that nor the 3rd say much more that she was called for the national team, so that's not a GNG pass.
Avilich (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
The ED source is paywalled. The others are the usual drivel you claim is GNG/SIGCOV. Vaissaire lives and plays in the Netherlands so doesn't have a "club career abroad". That shows your understanding of the sources. BTW playing football no longer makes someone notable so stop spamming AFD with that non argument. Dougal18 (talk) 13:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per sources above which show notability. GiantSnowman 21:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - If we look at the sources provided above, it is clear that most of them are versions of the same press release announcing a Suriname call-up for Vaissaire (and another diaspora player). This press release contains very little information about Vaissaire; she plays amateur football for SSS in the Topklasse (second level) and futsal for a club that competes in district-level tournaments. There is a Suriname match preview which drops her name, and a note that she won an award with her futsal team. This coverage is about all I could find online, and it is woefully short of satisfying the
    WP:GNG. Jogurney (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete. Sources clearly do not demonstrate GNG. Agreed with Dougal18 about spamming useless sources. JoelleJay (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shawn Teller (talk) 23:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a fundamental disagreement about the quality of sources presented.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:38, 27 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.