Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James McPike

: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. JForget 00:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

=[[James McPike]]=

:{{la|James McPike}} – (View AfD)(View log)

:({{findsources|James McPike}})

Player fails WP:ATHLETE as he has not played in a fully-professional league/cup. Also fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant thrid party media coverage. --Jimbo^[online] 16:44, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Delete- I don't agree with the original PROD removal. He has had nothing but trivial mentions and the run of the mill squad profiles. Spiderone 16:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Keep - subject meets the GNG. Articles such as [http://www.birminghammail.net/birmingham-sport/birmingham-city-fc/birmingham-city-fc-news/2008/10/24/james-mcpike-looking-to-hit-top-gear-97319-22111486/], [http://www.birminghammail.net/birmingham-sport/birmingham-city-fc/birmingham-city-fc-news/2008/05/16/judge-me-on-my-football-not-the-car-says-james-mcpike-97319-20921365/], [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-566263/Thanks-cleaning-boots--30-000-Mercedes-Soccer-stars-amazing-gift-boot-boy.html], and [http://www.birminghammail.net/birmingham-sport/birmingham-city-fc/birmingham-city-fc-news/2009/09/12/former-birmingham-city-man-james-mcpike-returns-to-solihull-moors-97319-24668272/] are RS stories specifically about Mr. McPike, not his team. This is not the totality of coverage, but should be sufficient to establish notability - all four of these articles represent "significant coverage" and only such stories are required. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:06, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

:I'm not sure. I mean Birmingham Mail is a local newspaper and they are likely to write articles on a lot of non-notable local sportspeople. Like my local paper, for example, writes detailed articles on tennis players who are 14-15. Spiderone 07:13, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

::There is no consensus that local papers are insufficient to establish notability. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Delete - Has his only full appearance was in the Conference National (which, due to the inclusion of teams like Histon F.C. and Hayes and Yeading F.C., isn't a full-time professional league), he hasn't fulfilled Wp:ATHLETE. (Note: for a case of a player in a similar position, see Wp:Articles for deletion/Kevin Scriven (2nd nomination).) DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 21:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Note: failure to meet ATHLETE is not an automatic disqualifier. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Delete - fails WP:ATHLETE. Also fails WP:GNG; of the four pieces Thaddeus has provided to "prove" notability, the first three all refer to one event (receiving a £30,000 car from another player) and the last one is a run-of-the-mill transfer piece, which fails WP:NTEMP. Not enough to prove notability - not by a long shot! Giant Snowman 15:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Giant Snowman 15:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Fails WP:Athlete which is enough consensus for me. Local notability isn't sufficient; local papers that indicate only local notability isn't sufficient. Shadowjams (talk) 08:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Per nom. GauchoDude (talk) 23:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

: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.