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 redirect to List of Gillingham F.C. players (1–24 appearances) per WP:ATD. – Joe (talk) 19:10, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Milton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:NFOOTY due to playing in an era before the English Football League was "fully professional". More importantly fails WP:GNG due to complete lack of WP:SIGCOV. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:08, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:17, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: where does it say that the Football League wasn't professional at that time? Per WP:FPL the Football League has been professional since its existence since no time frame is given. Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider this comment to apply to all your other nominations of this type. Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:49, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - playing in the Football League confers notability per WP:NFOOTBALL. Article needs improving, not deleting. GiantSnowman 16:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per NFOOTY and GS above. The Football League was founded as a professional entity and, the more I look at these cases, I think the nominator is guessing when he says these guys played before the league was fully professional. As far as I can ascertain, Bury for example was always a fully professional club and I have no reason to believe Gillingham and others were any different. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - firstly, is his name Alfred Minton or Alfred Milton? The article currently uses both. Given that there are many players in the modern era that have made a single league appearance but failed to meet GNG, I'm not sure that there is enough here to presume that Milton/Minton would have had WP:SIGCOV. British newspaper searches under both names don't seem to yield much about this footballer but I appreciate that there are other ways of finding coverage. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • is his name Alfred Minton or Alfred Milton? - definitely Milton. Some total idiot (i.e. me) typed it wrong when creating the article..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, if he really only played 1 game it is not enough to meet WP:GNG and the spirit of WP:NFOOTBALL, per countless other AFDs. This is regardless of the year he played in. However, one of the incoming links is also a possible redirect target. Geschichte (talk) 10:09, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:GNG. Unless someone can find significant coverage that covers the subject, this seems to be the consensus regardless of era played. GauchoDude (talk) 14:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I can't find any online sources other than trivial coverage. I can't access the offline sources mentioned in the article, but they appear to be similar to database entries which are most likely trivial. Even if Milton's single appearance in the Football League creates a presumption of notability, that presumption is invalid when the article comprehensively fails WP:GNG as this one does. Jogurney (talk) 19:26, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the comments of Jogurney and the nominator or redirect to List of Gillingham F.C. players (1–24 appearances), where he is mentioned Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:44, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Doesn't seem to be any real concern regarding WP:NFOOTY, but a lack of overall concensus around GNG. Nothing has been presented to indicate anything approaching significant coverage. Feel that this is a delete given the current input and complete lack of sources, but the NFOOTY / GNG discussion needs more time to be discussed to allow the presentation of sources that satisfy the claim to GNG which NFOOTY presumes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 22:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - fails WP:GNG. One FPL appearance that satisfies WP:NFOOTY doesn't mean GNG is met. Paul Vaurie (talk) 00:19, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - if the outcome is not to keep, I suggest redirecting to 1920–21 Gillingham F.C. season, when he played his one game..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:58, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - As it seems his sole claim to notability is to have played one game in the Football League (and there is nothing to suggest it is a particularly notable one) then it seems like a clear failure to meet GNG. The redirect suggestions by Spiderone and ChrisTheDude are worth strongly considering I think as a redirect would at least help identify that there was a Gillingham player of this name if someone searched for him, though I am not sure which is the best option. Dunarc (talk) 23:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the list article as a WP:ATD; in the absence of significant coverage, playing a single game is simply not enough to indicate notability. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:18, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From Chris' comment above, it probably is better to redirect to 1920–21 Gillingham F.C. season out of the two options, since it at least tells the reader which season he played his one game Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:08, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per Qwaiiplayer's rationale below, I think the list is better. There's nothing to say that list couldn't be expanded to mention/link what season(s) someone played in. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:41, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the list already records the date range of each player's Gillingham career, so it already shows that Milton's one appearance was in 1920. I'm not fussed either way...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of Gillingham F.C. players (1–24 appearances) as the subject fails GNG. I'm also ok with redirecting to 1920–21 Gillingham F.C. season, but it seems more appropriate to redirect an article about a person to a list of people rather than a football season. Ultimately, the same (limited) information about the subject will be present in both articles so it could go either way. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:31, 8 November 2021 (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.