Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madalyn Schiffel

Add links
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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 08:28, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Madalyn Schiffel

Madalyn Schiffel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails

WP:GNG Joeykai (talk) 02:11, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Kosack (talk) 08:58, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  1. A number of You tube videos focussing on her but all produced either by her college or the conference in which she competed. Therefore primary sources ineligible for GNG.
  2. Brief article but from a blog recognised as her college's official blog. Therefore primary source ineligible for GNG.
  3. Detailed career summary but from a club that she used to play for, not really independant enough for GNG.
  4. Reasonably lengthy article from her norwegian club but again a primary source.
  5. Couple of paragraphs of analysis following her draft. The only thing of note I could find from an independent source.
Fenix down (talk) 11:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Delete based on discussion below @
    WP:TOOSOON given her young age). KaisaL (talk) 13:00, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Sure. What WP:FPL means is that consensus has been achieved that the league in question is "fully professional", i.e. that all clubs in a given league are professional and the players for the first team don't need to work in any other jobs. Whilst therefore, there maybe "professional elements" in the Toppsieren (I presume Madalyn is professional as she has moved from the US), not all the clubs, nor all the players are, or at least no consensus has been reached that they are. Confusingly, this does not mean they are not, simply that no discussion has been had around the league in question. This is not particularly useful for women's football as there is a globally lower level of professionalism due to the lower level of popularity / coverage the game gets. As such, most female players who are not senior internationals need to rely on GNG. In this instance I don't see it and although the player is a regular at her club in Norway, I don't think she has been there long enough to have generated significant independent coverage (interviews and the like) in Norwegian sources. Fenix down (talk)
Ok, fair enough. I will go with your better judgement, then, and support a deletion. (It can be difficult to use
WP:GNG for sports and competitive fields, I've had the same difficulty with eSports topics at AFD recently.) KaisaL (talk) 13:22, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
You seem to have misinterpreted my list.
WP:BASIC is not met because all substantial coverage of this player comes from primary sources. The link you have provided goes a little way to GNG but is insufficient on its own. Fenix down (talk) 06:00, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Yeah, you'll need to search on https://www.google.no and do some translation as well. Some refs have been added. Article needs expansion, not deletion.. Hmlarson (talk) 06:11, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 08:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Women's soccer in Norway is nowhere near fully professional; Schiffel as an import player may be semi-pro. More importantly, Schiffel's team Avaldsnes IL is scheduled to contest the Champions League in less than two months (see 2016–17 UEFA Women's Champions League#Group 8). It should give an indication that Avaldsnes is a leading team in Europe, and thus on the "highest level" of women's soccer in Norway and Europe. Geschichte (talk) 09:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Does not meet GNG. She does not play in a fully professional league, so she is not meeting the notability guidelines for footballers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. She is a woman, and there are dramatically few professional women's leagues in the world. Geschichte (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as still nothing for the convincing independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 23:04, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. not my usual field, but playing in the top women's league in Norway should be acceptable, even if the league is not a highly notable or a fully profesional as the male leagues. She's at the top of the profession in her field. This is one of the acceptable ways of correcting our systematic bias. DGG ( talk ) 09:05, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, pro league argument not relevant for women, and no one has argumented against my comments above, to which I henceforth refer. If deleted, it would be without prejudice, and the article would be recreated when she plays in the Champions League. Geschichte (talk) 18:53, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep every day of the week and twice on Sundays. This Wikipedia-specific (or Wikipedia football project-specific) concept of "fully professionalism" doesn't amount to a hill of beans. 94.8.65.103 (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep We've seen in several recent discussions a lack of consensus to delete articles of top female footballers, with borderline media coverage, and a lack of national team appearances. This is due to systemic
    bias, we need to find ways to make the project more balanaced, not enforce rules that weren't designed to deal with this situation. We must remember that it is Wikipedia policy to Ignore All Rules. Nfitz (talk) 17:49, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Delete. Clearly fails
    WP:NFOOTY. There is just no evidence that she is a top player: she never made a national selection (U23 does not count), she is not playing in a top league and never did. I realize that women's football gets much less coverage than men's football, but even with this discount there is no evidence she is any close to the top.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:04, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment - what is that U23 selection? The Canadian and Brazilian squads use the full national team for tournaments where the men are U23, and the US sometimes sends a younger team. Was it a tournament didn't have a U23 requirement, and the US chose to send a U23 team anyway? Nfitz (talk) 17:03, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - No need to invoke IAR. This footballer satisfies
    WP:V#Notability with multiple references. Also, the content verifies her international notability when she played the U-20ish playoffs. --George Ho (talk) 20:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Also, she satisfies the
WP:BIO#Sports personalities, even when she might fail WP:NFOOTBALLER. --George Ho (talk) 20:43, 18 July 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Madalyn_Schiffel&oldid=1089525990"