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. The issue is whether the article subject meets WP:GNG. The sources provided to support notability have been analyzed in some detail by the "delete" side, showing that in their view the sources are insufficient in the light of WP:GNG. This analysis has largely remained unrebutted or unaddressed by the "keep" side, which makes the "delete" arguments substantially stronger. Sandstein 09:53, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yair Arrechea (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Can't find any significant coverage in Spanish. All that I could find are passing mentions. Fails WP:GNG. Merko (talk) 00:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football. Merko (talk) 00:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No SIGCOV, failes WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 18:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• keep per sources found by Ortizesp - good work! GiantSnowman 05:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @GiantSnowman, you clearly did not actually look at the sources, unless you, as an administrator, are somehow not aware that blogs and press releases from the player's own team unequivocally do not count towards GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 00:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  no, I did look at the sources. you know what they say when you make assumptions... GiantSnowman 14:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @GiantSnowman So you actually consider the blogs and press releases sufficient to meet GNG? JoelleJay (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  no. I consider the overall coverage of this individual (from only a seemingly quick Google search) sufficient for him to be notable. GiantSnowman 12:00, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep another lazy nomination, of a footballer with over 200 appearances in a pro league. Some references: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and tons more significant coverage in Latin American sites. Guys, please stop taking the lazy way out and do a proper BEFORE, AFD isn't supposed to be a removal tool.@Merko:@Alexandermcnabb:@GiantSnowman:--Ortizesp (talk) 04:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails GNG. Sources found lack significant coverage and independence from Arrechea. Dougal18 (talk) 10:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdrawn nomination per sources provided by Ortizesp. Merko (talk) 12:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The sources are: a call up to the national team (cited twice), two interviews about him marking Ronaldo, a transfer story (routine coverage) that confuses him with his brother Yovanni and a paragraph on him and his brother. The Independiente sources are ignored as they are not independent of Arrechea as he used to play for them. Dougal18 (talk) 13:57, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, and those are all valid and significant coverage.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:05, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  No they are not. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Merko cannot withdraw a nom that has delete !votes, so it's irrelevant anyway, but Ortizesp's interpretation of what constitutes SIGCOV seemingly includes blogs, obviously non-independent sources, trivial mentions, and routine transactional coverage despite being shown/told over and over and over that these do not count toward GNG. His assertions of the nom being lazy and not doing BEFORE are completely baseless and stupendously ironic given the garbage sources (like the one on Yair's brother) that he put forth.

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Independiente Santa Fe 1	interview with club website		4 sentences of routine background	✘ No
Independiente Santa Fe 2			1 sentence on transaction	✘ No
El Pais			1 sentence on transaction	✘ No
Soy del Vinotinto y Oro blog	who knows	it's a BLOG	Q&A interview with 4 questions	✘ No
Caracol			brief mention in transaction report	✘ No
Futbol Red			at best, 4 sentences on him in the context of he and his brother both having scored for ISF	✘ No
Columbia.com			despite the title, this routine transactional coverage is on his brother	✘ No
GE Globo			something like 2 sentences on him, the rest being quotes and the interviewer's background on Ronaldo and Dentinho	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment although several editors, not least the nominator, withdrew their view to delete the article, not everyone did, so further discussion is required. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Firstly he has made 200+ appearances in a fully pro league, secondly, I found 1 and 2 more sources about him besides the ones @Ortizesp: found. Thirdly, he has a Spanish Wikipedia page and is probably known in Colombia. Lastly, even the nominator withdrew his deletion nomination. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 18:08, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Appearances in pro leagues mean literally nothing as that metric was deprecated specifically because it was such a terrible predictor of notability. 2. BeSoccer has zero info on their authors (author?) so cannot be considered reliable, and anyway that one is an interview with little secondary commentary so it fails independent SIGCOV as well. The Antenna2 article similarly cannot be verified, and also contains strictly injury reporting, which has long been classed as routine coverage for sportspeople. 3. It doesn't matter whether he has an es wiki page, other editions have different notability criteria. 4. The nom withdrew without understanding the outrageously poor quality of the sources, and should reconsider that decision. JoelleJay (talk) 22:58, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I withdrew based on the fact that I wouldn't have nominated if I had seen those sources in the first place. In a WP:BEFORE search, I found literally nothing. Merko (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  But @Merko, none of those sources can even partially contribute to notability due to not being independent, not being reliable, not containing SIGCOV, or not even being about Yair. WP:NSPORT explicitly requires coverage beyond routine match reports, and GNG requires coverage that is direct and in detail -- which four sentences on him and his brother cannot fulfill. JoelleJay (talk) 05:47, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per JoelleJay. BilledMammal (talk) 06:48, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Passes GNG. Simione001 (talk) 01:13, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• How? Based on what evidence?4meter4 (talk) 06:23, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSPORT.4meter4 (talk) 06:23, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the source table by JoelleJay that clearly shows that there is not enough SIGCOV and therefore NSPORT has not been met --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 09:30, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Arrechea was a mainstay in the defense of several top-flight Colombian football clubs during the internet era, so I would expect that we could find SIGCOV. That said, there are literally hundreds of match reports, previews, and miscellaneous trivial coverage in Spanish-language sources. I searched Ibagué-based El Nuevo Día's archives (where Arrechea played for many years), and could only find one article that could be SIGCOV (although it's really more about the team's defense - of which he was a key component). I worry that we haven't done the work collectively to determine if the GNG can be met (the sources evaluated in the table above are not a good sampling of what's available online), but it's proving more difficult for me than expected. Jogurney (talk) 18:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also found this blogpost that approaches SIGCOV (at least in the section on Arrechea). It's from a blog run by a Deportivo Pasto supporter, which normally wouldn't count towards the GNG, but based on the content at the website, they appear to have some expertise in Colombian football (as opposed to simply being a fanboy). Jogurney (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • His hometown paper (well, same Department), El Nuevo Liberal doesn't appear to dedicate much ink to his recent footballing exploits (perhaps if we could access the newspaper's earlier archives, there would be more). I could only find snippets like [1] and [2]. Jogurney (talk) 19:39, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I appreciate the work you've put in here and hope you do find something. The blog is definitely out -- strictly forbidden for BLPs. The other source is certainly the best we've gotten so far, though still only a few sentences on him specifically. My own searches earlier also came up empty apart from the numerous routine mentions. JoelleJay (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep - This article is about a top Colombian footballer during the 2010s, who was even called up to his national team. There are so many mentions of him in match reports (I know it's routine coverage, but there is a book's worth of it), and a few articles that rise to a level that is either SIGCOV or preciously close ([3], [4] - behind a paywall, but not your average match preview, and [5] get me there). I think there's just enough to suggest the GNG can be passed if we had better access to Colombian newspaper archives that date back to the late 2000s and early 2010s (unfortunately, I don't). Jogurney (talk) 02:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Unfortunately I would not agree the interviews in El Tiempo, El Nuevo Dia, and El Espectador approach SIGCOV. Quotes from the subject never contribute to GNG, and removing those we're left with just one complete sentence about him in the first, roughly two sentences in the second, and two-ish in the third. JoelleJay (talk) 23:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Played in a professional league and called up for a national team, generally considered notable. I think the sources found by others are enough to satisfy GNG Hzh (talk) 09:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  "Played in a professional league and called up for a national team, generally considered notable. " Try again. WP:NFOOTBALL is no more. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:31, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Sportsfan 1234 Well, apparently if enough keep !voters make these arguments, NFOOTY is resurrected and becomes DRV-proof, so I can see why editors would continue to make such arguments. JoelleJay (talk) 21:14, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't mean to speak for Hzh, but I didn't see any mention of NFOOTBALL in their !vote rationale. Instead, they said the article satisfies the GNG (it's close of course, but I concur). I suspect they mentioned the national team call-up and professional career for similar reasons to my own (it illustrates that this article isn't one of thousands about marginal or journeyman footballers who rarely turn out for their clubs, instead this one concerns a notable footballer with achievements beyond those of a marginal or even regular squad member). Jogurney (talk) 00:30, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NSPORT. No coverage. scope_creep^Talk 09:43, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nom. John Yunshire (talk) 16:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per sources found by Ortizesp.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. After 15 years, this thing is still barely a stub. The Keep arguments do not hold up. If they did, somebody would have said something else about this person by now. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 06:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't believe the current state of the article matters. We've identified some sources here that can be used to expand it significantly, but I don't plan to do so if the consensus is to delete (which isn't apparent to me yet). Jogurney (talk) 13:44, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:GNG due to lack of WP:SIGCOV. I'm not seeing the required significant coverage in the sources that have been presented. Alvaldi (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2022 (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.