Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dillon Phillips

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 14:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dillon Phillips

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

PROD contested by article creator; this fails both WP:GNG (due to lack of significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources) and WP:NFOOTBALL (as he has not yet played in a fully-professional league.) Argument that he will become notable in the future fail WP:CRYSTAL. Giant Snowman 09:43, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 09:44, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that Dillon is not yet an established player, however I disagree that there is a lack of significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources - he has been written about on multiple news sites and is featured on YouTube albeit from content created by his employer. He is not just a youth team member of his team; he is a full blown squad member. The article does not speculate about his future (therefore not failing WP:CRYSTAL), my point was that I am not sure it is worth everybody's effort in deleting it when it was very likely that he will play in the near future Adam.P.Shaw (talk) 10:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Can you point us to any of this significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources you refer to? Because there isn't any cited in the article as it stands......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:44, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - He has not played in a fully pro league or received significant coverage, meaning the article fails WP:NSPORT and WP:GNG. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:11, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Added further references to Skysports, BBC, Youtube and various other regional news.Adam.P.Shaw (talk) 21:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is WP:ROUTINE transfer/contract news - it is NOT the "significant" coverage required for GNG. Giant Snowman 10:30, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:36, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - He hasn't played in a Fully professional league and he doesn't have any international caps either therefore he fails WP:NFOOTBALL. @Adam.P.Shaw, you can recreate the article when he becomes notable, sandbox the article's content for use at a later date therefore the time and effort you've put into creating this article won't be wasted. IJA (talk) 18:30, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NFOOTY as has not played senior international football nor played in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Completely agree with the comments above that the coverage so far is no morethan WP:ROUTINE match / transfer reporting. Fenix down (talk) 11:21, 8 September 2014 (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.