- 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. Spartaz Humbug! 12:43, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Magsad Isayev ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested PROD. Concern was Article about a footballer who fails WP:GNG and who has not played in a fully pro league. PROD was contested based on a claim that the Azerbaijan Premier League is fully pro, a claim not supported by reliable sources. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:56, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 15:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTBALL. Giant Snowman 16:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. According to WP:NFOOTBALL players who have played in a fully professional league are notable. Seyidov played in Neftchi Baku which is a clup of Azerbaijan professional leage. The list of fully professional leagues in WikiProject Football is not completed (It's mentioned there). Azerbaijani football clubs (including Neftchi) play in UEFA European League (even in group stage), which says that Azerbaijan football league is fully professional. Interfase ( talk) 20:18, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Concluding full professionalism of a league based on the success of its clubs in other competitions is
original research. Unless the claim that the league is fully pro can be supported by a reliable source, that claim carries no weight. (See closing remarks at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarlan Guliyev for a more detailed explanation.)
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
20:43, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- I added Azerbaijan to the list. Because there are two professional football divisions in Azerbaijan, the Azerbaijan Premier League and the Azerbaijan First Division
[1] --
Interfase (
talk)
13:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- This source has been rejected several times in discussions at
WT:FPL since the EFPL has ambiguous membership criteria, meaning this source does not actually confirm the league's status one way or the other.
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
14:42, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Austria also is not professional then. There is the same source. Some countries has even their own national associations as a source. Do you know even which criteria should be use to consider any league as professional, which source is reliable for you? --
Interfase (
talk)
17:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- The status of the Austrian Bundesliga is not relevant here. The issue with EPFL is not one of reliability but of ambiguity. Despite the organisation's name, there is nothing on the EPFL website to indicate that it actually has any professionalism requirements for member leagues. What would be needed for inclusion at
WP:FPL is a source that unambiguously states that all footballers in the Azerbaijan Premier League are payed a living wage. Given that in several discussions at
WT:FPL over several years no one has been able to produce such a source, I highly doubt it exists.
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
17:37, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- No one has every produced a source that shows it isn't fully professional either. Everyone agrees that every other full member of the EPFL is fully professional.
Nfitz (
talk)
19:09, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- How is that relevant, there is no concensus that membership of the EPFL means that a country's league is fully professional? You may wish to refresh your knowledge of
simple logical fallacies.
Fenix down (
talk)
12:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Logical fallacies has nothing to do with it. For most leagues that aren't fully professional, it's easy enough to find sources that indicate that the league isn't fully professional. Comments in the media about the players other jobs. Lack of money for players, etc. Instead here we have a bunch of foreigners deeming that the league isn't fully professional without any evidence ever being found on that. Whlie this doesn't support a keep, it does raise questions of
WP:BIAS.
Nfitz (
talk)
14:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- It has everything to do with it. You said "these leagues are therefore this league must also be"!
WP:FPL is a consensus generate list which explicitly states in its first sentence that it is a list of those "known" to be FPL and those "known" not to be. This means the list is inherently incomplete. Nobody is saying it is not fully professional, it doesn't appear in the list of known non-FPL leagues for example, merely there have been no sources uncovered that indicate that it is. No Bias at all, simply a list that is incomplete. Why not take it upon yourself to delve into Azeri sources and try to come to a conclusion one way or the other.
Fenix down (
talk)
15:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- I've tried to delve into sources - and found nothing conclusive one way or another. There's a lot to indicate it's fully professional - but no conclusive proof one way or another. I don't see how it isn't WP:BIAS, and I very much doubt that we would have this knowledge-gap if we were dealing with an English-speaking country like Wales, New Zealand, or Ireland, for which we've found plenty of proof. At the same time, we dismiss the EPLF reference for one country because it's not conclusive, but we accept it for another, because "we all know it's fully professional"? That's a perfect example of WP:BIAS. Nfitz ( talk) 14:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
- It has everything to do with it. You said "these leagues are therefore this league must also be"!
WP:FPL is a consensus generate list which explicitly states in its first sentence that it is a list of those "known" to be FPL and those "known" not to be. This means the list is inherently incomplete. Nobody is saying it is not fully professional, it doesn't appear in the list of known non-FPL leagues for example, merely there have been no sources uncovered that indicate that it is. No Bias at all, simply a list that is incomplete. Why not take it upon yourself to delve into Azeri sources and try to come to a conclusion one way or the other.
Fenix down (
talk)
15:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Logical fallacies has nothing to do with it. For most leagues that aren't fully professional, it's easy enough to find sources that indicate that the league isn't fully professional. Comments in the media about the players other jobs. Lack of money for players, etc. Instead here we have a bunch of foreigners deeming that the league isn't fully professional without any evidence ever being found on that. Whlie this doesn't support a keep, it does raise questions of
WP:BIAS.
Nfitz (
talk)
14:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- How is that relevant, there is no concensus that membership of the EPFL means that a country's league is fully professional? You may wish to refresh your knowledge of
simple logical fallacies.
Fenix down (
talk)
12:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- No one has every produced a source that shows it isn't fully professional either. Everyone agrees that every other full member of the EPFL is fully professional.
Nfitz (
talk)
19:09, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- The status of the Austrian Bundesliga is not relevant here. The issue with EPFL is not one of reliability but of ambiguity. Despite the organisation's name, there is nothing on the EPFL website to indicate that it actually has any professionalism requirements for member leagues. What would be needed for inclusion at
WP:FPL is a source that unambiguously states that all footballers in the Azerbaijan Premier League are payed a living wage. Given that in several discussions at
WT:FPL over several years no one has been able to produce such a source, I highly doubt it exists.
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
17:37, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Austria also is not professional then. There is the same source. Some countries has even their own national associations as a source. Do you know even which criteria should be use to consider any league as professional, which source is reliable for you? --
Interfase (
talk)
17:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- This source has been rejected several times in discussions at
WT:FPL since the EFPL has ambiguous membership criteria, meaning this source does not actually confirm the league's status one way or the other.
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
14:42, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- I added Azerbaijan to the list. Because there are two professional football divisions in Azerbaijan, the Azerbaijan Premier League and the Azerbaijan First Division
[1] --
Interfase (
talk)
13:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Concluding full professionalism of a league based on the success of its clubs in other competitions is
original research. Unless the claim that the league is fully pro can be supported by a reliable source, that claim carries no weight. (See closing remarks at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarlan Guliyev for a more detailed explanation.)
Sir Sputnik (
talk)
20:43, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 00:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:NFOOTY as has not played senior international football nor played in a fully professional league. No indication that subject has garnered significant reliable coverage for any other achievements to satisfy GNG. Fenix down ( talk) 12:31, 15 September 2014 (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.