Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leonel Alvim Neto

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. J04n(talk page) 11:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leonel Alvim Neto

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

Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested on the grounds that his two appearances for Canoas were in a fully pro league. Soccerway confirms that this is not the case. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 17:48, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the subject fails WP:NFOOTY as he has not played in a fully pro league or represented his country at senior level. Also fails WP:GNG due to lack of in-depth coverage. Mentoz86 (talk) 14:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I cannot find any evidence that the article could satisfy the GNG, and it's unclear whether he's played in a fully-pro league (even if he had, it was so marginal that I think we should use common sense and ignore it). Jogurney (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2013 (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.