Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luqman Hakim Shamsudin

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 keep. (non-admin closure) 4meter4 (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Luqman Hakim Shamsudin

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

After initially putting it up to WP:PROD before it got removed, I am putting it up to Afd as the player hasn't played in an WP:FPL match despite being in a team which is eligible for this. HawkAussie (talk) 22:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. HawkAussie (talk) 22:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. HawkAussie (talk) 22:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. HawkAussie (talk) 22:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - GNG satisfied: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] + more. Loads of coverage across various outlets. Not terribly dissimilar to AfD/Caoimhin Kelleher. R96Skinner (talk) 00:04, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw - Ok I might of pressed the Afd button too quickly as I didn't do a WP:BEFORE before putting this up for Afd. HawkAussie (talk) 04:13, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the withdraw, but I'm actually in favour of draftifying per WP:NOTNEWS as this is a youth player who hasn't made a fully professional appearance, and the articles are all either WP:BLP1E (him signing a professional contract) or mere transfer blurbs. We can move him to mainspace when he makes an appearance. SportingFlyer T·C 07:51, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:40, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets GNG. I was going to close this as withdrawn but @SportingFlyer: prefers to draftify so I won't until (if/when) they change their mind. Giant Snowman 08:43, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is he fails the WP:10YT. If he never plays a game, I don't think he would be notable. SportingFlyer T·C 14:21, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SportingFlyer: you can get notable young players who never make it, the classic example is Sonny Pike. Giant Snowman 10:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GiantSnowman: Yes, but Luqman didn't sign for Ajax at seven years of age. He's just a youth international who signed for a European team, who's not even listed in their first team. The Caoimhin Kelleher comparison is courageously false, as Kelleher was named on a team playing in the most prestigious club match of the year, has received wide international coverage in spite of his lack of an appearance, and has gone onto play for Liverpool if only in the EFL Cup, whereas Luqman is just... a youth player who signed for a Belgian team. All of the coverage is recent and he likely fails WP:BLP1E at this point. SportingFlyer T·C 02:02, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's all your personal opinion, though. "just a youth international who signed for a European team" (which is what Sonny Pike literally did do, btw...) to you, perhaps, but it's (evidently) a big event to Malaysians and arguably Belgian people of interest. "All of the coverage is recent", well he is 17? What do you want, pieces on what happened on his first day at school? Joking aside, I believe your opinions are just that. Also, I wasn't even directly comparing this AfD to the Kelleher one, though you could (I wouldn't) even argue the UCL stuff was (at time of AfD) BLP1E; also, saying "has gone onto..." isn't fair or relevant, as we can't predict the future at AfDs. R96Skinner (talk) 03:16, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The recent coverage directly contradicts WP:NOTNEWS, though. I'm not looking for pieces from his first day of school, I'm looking for sustained coverage of him as a professional footballer, which hasn't happened yet because he's not even signing until March 2020. No one here has shown there's any sort of lasting notability which would pass the WP:10Y test - it's also WP:TOOSOON. We do not typically keep players who fail WP:NFOOTY unless they clearly get beyond WP:GNG, and especially not youth players - I still don't see any reason why we would be making an exception for him. SportingFlyer T·C 05:45, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently, as seen at AfD plenty of times, NFOOTY is, not that I agree, practically worthless - it's all about GNG, which is always arguable; that's why I'd say SNGs are a better way to go, because at least it's a consistent notability line which leaves no, or little to no, questions. The fact (I missed that, good spot!) he doesn't join until 2020, in my opinion, emphasises how notable this player is - this much coverage for something that is a while away from happening, clearly high interest. Even away from the Kortrijk stuff, Luqman is/was still getting attention: [11], [12], [13], [14]. R96Skinner (talk) 13:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NFOOTY actually isn't useless. Per User:Levivich/NFooty_AfDs#No_NFooty, if you don't meet WP:NFOOTY, you're almost certainly getting deleted, though I agree many of those don't have sources presented. With regards to the final four sources you've just presented, see WP:YOUNGATH - they're all game/routine coverage of a youth player. SportingFlyer T·C 11:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can see we aren't going to agree here, which isn't a problem - this is what AfDs are for I guess. Happy editing! R96Skinner (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:38, 25 September 2019 (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.