Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lasse Schulz

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 move to draft‎. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:29, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lasse Schulz

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

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

Non-notable football player. I was unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:59, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finland and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:52, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He is the goalkeeper of the Finland U21-team for the upcoming Euro qualifiers, and the next season he will play for Danish Superliga club. I disagree that he is non-notable. I added and will ad more references if that helps. Syvä-äksy (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2023.

And why is it straight "nomination to deletion" but not this: "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for sports and athletics. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Syvä-äksy (talk) 17:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't predict notability, perhaps he will become notable soon but as of now, I have not seen anything that amounts to significant coverage in reliable sources. The recreation of deleted articles happens all the time (I do it myself) and you can recreate it then. I don't notability tag when I believe the subject is almost definitely not notable. From my understanding of the sources, they are either database entries or primary sources/press releases. This was all I found in my WP:BEFORE checks as well. I don't speak Finnish and instead used Google Translate, so please forgive me if this assessment is incorrect and explain what they are. If you do find sources beyond the ones in the article that allow the subject to fulfill WP:GNG I will gladly withdraw this nomination. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:47, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:07, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I'm seeing a good amount of coverage online like this, and this, and think they pass GNG.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:47, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The former I cannot access due to a paywall but the latter is the most routine of coverage: a transfer report and from a low-quality source. Robby.is.on (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Like Robby.is.on said, I cannot access the first, even assuming it is high quality and reliable the second is the opposite. You need more than one article for GNG. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per Ortixzesp. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the replies to that comment. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify - no current significant coverage, but likely to be notable in future. Giant Snowman 08:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support a draftification as well ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify until more sources can be found to establish notability. Article needs significant improvement as well. Paul Vaurie (talk) 04:27, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify or Delete - Article fails WP:GNG as no significant coverage has been identified above, and my BEFORE search didn't turn up anything better. Jogurney (talk) 02:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify - Satisfied this person may be notable in the future. However, sourcing is not sufficient for a mainspace article at present. Drafting is an acceptable ATD. Consensus here makes drafting the conclusion until appropriate sourcing is found. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:22, 31 August 2023 (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.