Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamding Tsering

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 January 18.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 articles in question, while well-meaning and well-written, are poorly sourced, although not for want of trying. They also fail WP:ATHLETE, as they have not played at "the fully professional level of a sport", that is, international-level games. Even a match against Greenland is not truly international, as Greenland is not currently an independent nation. Until the team plays regular international matches against more than one side - perhaps in a league - many of the players will not pass WP:ATHLETE. I have no doubt that this will go to Deletion Review and that I will have knives of fire thrown at me for deleting these articles, but I cannot see that they have played football at a fully professional level, and cannot in good conscience keep the articles. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 17:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tamding Tsering[edit]

Footballer who fails WP:ATHLETE because he has never competed at a professional level. He plays for Tibet national football team, but that team is not affiliated to FIFA and therefore doesn't participate in the FIFA World Cup or the relevant regional competition. The arguments regarding Tibetan footballers was undertaken in the recent afd at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tenzin Tsering. I proposed the remaining articles for deletion, all of which have been contested.

I am not nominating Tsering Dhundup because there is evidence provided that he is a political activist. I am also not nominating Tashi Tsering (footballer) because he has played for the Nepal national football team, which does participate in FIFA competitions. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:28, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because the following players are footballers who fail WP:ATHLETE, for reasons similar to those given above. They haven't played for a professional club, and the only "international" football they have played has been for Tibet. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fail Bio and also the less strict Athlete. BigDunc^Talk 20:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--The articles about the players from Tibet were nominated for deletion using a prod based on the deletion of Tenzin Tsering. After searching for sources to establish notability users have found two players so far that are notable beside the connection to the national team. The nomination says that the National Team of Tibet is not affiliated to FIFA. It's important to understand that this organization's decisions are heavily influenced by politics, 1, 2,3, 4: "The national teams of Tibet, Northern Cyprus and Gibraltar have seen their progress hampered by larger countries with a political interest in the territories." Our WP:ATHLETE guideline should not be based solely on the politics of FIFA and China. Keep the articles until we can judge them on their own merits. --J.Mundo (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to stop the players from playing for a professional club, however. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to stop the players from warranting an article in the encyclopedia by virtue of our notability guidelines. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - these players fail every single one of our notability guidelines. We cannot verify that any of them have played for Tibet, which is not at the footballing standard of most FIFA-affiliated national teams. Even if this did not warrant deletion, it does not prevent any of them from playing for professional club side, in a fully professional league, and it is likely that if any of them were good enough, they would be picked up by one. There is no significant coverage from independent reliable sources. See also: arguments made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tenzin Tsering. – Toon ^(talk) 21:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources are available to verify the notability of the players, 1, 2. --J.Mundo (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources verify the notability of the team, which is not in question. They just mention the names of the players individually and do not cover them in any depth. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for researching, but those articles stand for the notability of the team more than any single player listed for deletion here. Only a few of the players are mentioned in those articles (Tenzin Dhargyal and Tseten Namgyal). The article also makes it clear that these players are part-timers so they are not playing in a fully-pro league. Since they fail WP:ATHLETE, the articles need to pass WP:BIO and I see no evidence of that. Jogurney (talk) 22:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a lot of articles to consider. I also think a merge to a team article as needed is a superior result to deletion. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:53, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your logic. You say keep, then you give an irrational reason - do you mean you would vote differently if there was only four articles listed?). Finally you say a merge is preferable - what content is there to merge? Jmorrison230582 (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the articles are deleted there isn't much to merge. If some or all of them aren't individually notable enough for independent articles then merging them to a team article seems reasonable. Was a merge ever attempted? That would have been my first option before a deletion nomination. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:56, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - per J.Mundo. - NeutralHomer • Talk • January 12, 2009 @ 22:11
Strong Keep I think it is going a little too fast to delete lots of articles after the rapid deletion of article on Tenzin Tsering. One should wait at least two weeks to leave the possibility of adding valuable information. I have actually just added some info in Tibet national football team concerning the association linked to it. Although I did not explored all the possible data, this is clearly showing the prestigious organization of this team. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 22:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment So it has been said that these players meet our notability criteria I will take just 2 for an example Nyima Gyalpo and Gonpo Dorjee just picked at random from the list. Can you show me were they have met any of the below criteria
“Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.
"Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
"Sources," defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.
"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.
"Presumed" means that substantive coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, of notability. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not suitable for inclusion. For example, it may violate what Wikipedia is not.

Can someone show how they meet these requirements. BigDunc^Talk 22:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These football players represent the Tibetan national squad in exile, a population of 6 million people (that is WP:ATHLETE) Davin (talk) 15:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete player articles I do agree that the player articles should be deleted, simply on the basis of failings to qualify via WP:Athlete, (As never playing a professional game at National level or International level.) However this does not stop an article about the team. In a single article the names can be listed and no player should have an article until they have played professional football. Govvy (talk) 22:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per the article cited by JMundo, these players are part-timers and do not pass WP:ATHLETE. Also, there is no evidence provided which shows they pass WP:BIO. Jogurney (talk) 22:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Parallel discussion running at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 January 11 where I challenged the first deletion (of Tenzin Tsering). Thanks to Jmorrison230582 for bringing this class action up here (I still disagree with this user though and oppose deletion). Power.corrupts (talk) 23:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on the same grounds as Jmundo Ijanderson (talk) 00:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, WP:ATHLETE doesn't state anything about footballers having to represent FIFA nations. NF-board is the ruling-body and playing internationally for Tibet is still the highest level to these players. --Jimbo^[online] 02:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The players haven't competed at a professional level, and they haven't competed at the highest amateur level. So why are they notable? It's too bad that they can't compete for Tibet in the World Cup, but the fact is they don't. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because they've played in NF-board international matches. Can't get any higher than international honours. --Jimbo^[online] 03:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

J.Mundo could you explain to me how the two sources you provide in any way establish the notability of the individual players? BigDunc^Talk 11:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right each article should be judged on its own merits unfortunately the format of this massive deletion of 19 pages doesn't permit that. How much research when into deciding what players didn't meet our notability guidelines? The best example is Tsering Dhundup, tag for deletion using a prod with the same argument that he was a Tibetan player and later found to be a political activist arrested by China. Guilty by association is not a valid reason for deletion. --J.Mundo (talk) 15:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) And either is notability by association a valid reason to keep. The reason I voted Delete is that none of the players listed meet notability requirements, you provided a reason that Dhundup might meet notability why can you not do it for the rest. Not one valid source has been given to prove notability on any of the players listed. BigDunc^Talk 19:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Timing isn't the issue. WP:FOOTY project members have researched these articles and it just so happens that there are very few of these players that can be sourced (Tashi Tsering (footballer) was the only one I found to have been mentioned in match reports). If someone in the future finds sources that establish these articles will pass WP:BIO (or even WP:ATHLETE), they can quite easily re-create them then. What is the point of keeping articles with little or no content on the hope that someday someone will provide the sources necessary to pass WP guidelines? Jogurney (talk) 19:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions: Did you say researched? How many members from WP:FOOTY were involved in this? Can you direct us to the page where this discussion happened? --J.Mundo (talk) 19:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I was speaking for myself, but I believe others in the project did research as well. Jogurney (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly researched them, and was in the process of adding sources to Tashi Tsering (footballer) but Jogurney beat me to it. Surely if you're that passionate about keeping them J.Mundo you've done the research as well? I don't see many sources popping up from you either. Basement12 (T.C) 11:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - even if playing for Tibet was enough to establish notability, and I don't believe it is, there is no evidence that most of the players in question have done so (match reports for example). I have not seen anything to suggest to be that these players pass ATHLETE, BIO or any other criteria for inclusion. There is virtually no information in the articles so there isn't even anything to merge into the main Tibet national football team article (beyond their clubs but as these are mostly unsourced and red links anyway i'd question their worth. At best the pages could be left as redirects to the team article. Basement12 (T.C) 14:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all for failing WP:ATHLETE. Giant Snowman 14:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep These football players represent the Tibetan national squad in exile, a population of 6 million people (that is WP:ATHLETE). It's not their fault that political circumstances are the way they are. We can at least respect that Wikipedia does not support the wish of undemocratic regimes. Davin (talk) 15:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tenzin Tsering has been deleted yet in a massive deletionist attack [1] [2] It seems to be ease to get crowds of people together here that will definitely vote massively 'delete' over here ... Davin (talk) 15:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Can you please explain to me why asking Wikiproject Football members to comment on a Football AfD is somehow a "massive deletionist attack"? Surely it's just common sense? You also seem to be neglecting to mention your interesting attempts at vote-stacking? – Toon ^(talk) 15:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Because it only provoked people to vote 'delete' after you did that. You know your way here better than me. Don't play the fool now. Davin (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment - The reason it provoked people to vote delete is because that's the correct outcome! I didn't ask them to vote delete, I asked them to come over and have a look for themselves! The players clearly fail the notability guidelines. – Toon ^(talk) 23:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I haven't seen one irrational delete vote, all the votes cast for deletion have been on grounds due to the extradite Tibet footballers having failed to play at a high enough level of competition in football. As it goes, the extradite Tibet national team do not play in any recognised competitions, thus all player articles fail WP:Athlete on grounds, because either they haven't played in a high enough competition in club and the major factor, because the Tibet national team does not play any recognised competition football at all, which thus fails WP:Athlete yet again. This brings me to the next problem, the votes for keep are because there are some external links which has the players name, a name on a list is not notable, there must be at least a few citations, news links. More evidence than just a name on another website to even pass WP:BIO which is clearly failing on every article up for AfD. Thus, why I vote delete earlier above. Govvy (talk) 19:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - clear cut case of failing to meet WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:ATHLETE, and probably a whole host of WP:something else as well! One of the most obvious delete of football-related articles since I've been with Wikipedia. - fchd (talk) 20:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If these players had been selected from the whole Tibetan population to play for Tibet then I would accept that that would confer notability, but actually they are selected from the much smaller pool of Tibetan expatriates who are willing to act in defiance of the Chinese regime, i.e. who do not wish to return to Tibet and are not frightened of any possible consequences for their families. This means that they are in no way a team truly representative of their nation, so playing for this team does not get through WP:ATHLETE. This may be unfair, but having a Wikipedia article isn't some sort of honour in recognition of courage or good intentions. Also no sources have been presented to indicate that any of the players may pass any other notability criteria. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:39, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the following common sense reasons:

- Notability. We are talking about the players of the Tibet national football team. Common sense implies that they are notable in Tibet, to the extent that people there are aware that such a team exits. Notability in Tibet is notability. I would also say that notability in the eksile-Tibetan community is notability.

- Verifiability. Serious problem if verifiability equals Google footprint. It's about 20 ago years ago since I travelled Tibet, even with some quantum leaps of development, I would assume big time problems with Internet penetration there, in particular among the Tibetan segment, add thereto literacy problems and their own special curly alphabet. Verifiability goes both to verify that they are in fact notable there, and to verify the identity of the players.

- Athlete, there is no way they can pass, but it is not relevant if they pass the first two.

Google reveals that a Dane facilitated the creation of the team and organized the first match against Greenland. A film on the team came out in 2003, ref here and here, unfortunately pages are in Danish and the sites do not qualify as independent, a blog and an NGO. According to the sites, the match was covered in "international media" and in "Radio Free Tibet" (appears to be part of Radio Free Asia). I have e-mailed the organizers and filmmakers if they have evidence of notability and verifiability, and pointed them to this page.

Why I oppose deletion: Most of the deletion arguments reflect bureaucratic reasoning of the most rigid type. Nominee's key point of departure is that the team is not affiliated to FIFA and therefore "not international", hence, "not notable". Chinese bullying and general appeasement will ensure that FIFA affiliation is impossible. In effect, the nominee allows China to define the outcome of WP's notability decision process in this case. This is problematic

I would also like to challenge BigDunc's assertation of imminent chaos (here): We have the Homeless World Cup, are these soccer players notable?. Wikipedia has a notability guideline, the arguments above are construed as if Wikipedia had a notability policy and a common law system. It is precisely this difference that ensures that we wont have the Homeless World Cup problem anytime soon.

Please name an article about a player in the Homeless World Cup. Nobody is suggesting that the Tibet national football team or the Homeless World Cup articles themselves should be deleted, because they both clearly pass Notability due to the media coverage of each organisation. Articles about individual players in both entities have serious weaknesses, however, because of a lack of coverage due to the low standard of competition, which means that there are few if any reliable sources. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 23:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also concerned about the inertia of this wiki-lawyering deletionist steamroller. First a single article Tenzin Tsering is deleted. As in common law, this is used as precedent to leverage deletion of the entire team. What's next? I have just seen that Greenland national football team is not affiliated to FIFA, so this might be the next victim of this massacre. Power.corrupts (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, nobody is suggesting that the TEAM article should be deleted. If there are articles about individual Greenland players asserting notability purely because they have played for Greenland, then, yes, they should be deleted also. But presently I only see one Greenland player linked, and he appears to play for a professional club in Denmark. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 23:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, except that it doesn't. Only one member of the Greenland team has his own article, and he passes the guidelines, policies call it what you will by his professional play in Denmark. All of the other Greelandic team members are redlinks, and would probably end up here at AfD if the articles were created. Are any of the individual players from the Homeless World Cup notable? I don't know, I've not even looked at that article. I'm basing my response on these articles, as they stand now, and how they relate to the core tenets of Wikipedia, which as if you hadn't guessed is still a major delete. - fchd (talk) 23:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ATHLETE is not a core tenant just a guideline. On the other hand "Wikipedia does not have firm rules" is a pillar of Wikipedia. The political situation of Tibet goes beyond the scope of WP:Athlete. --J.Mundo (talk) 01:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Let's ignore WP:ATHLETE here. How do any of these articles possibly pass the standard guidelines such as WP:N or WP:BIO. They don't. If we want to keep the articles someone needs to step up and add reliable sources which provide non-trivial coverage of these players (not the team itself). I don't see it happening. Jogurney (talk) 02:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As the nominator points out, they all play on a national team. Nfitz (talk) 03:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you realise that we can't verify that they actually do? – Toon ^(talk) 11:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for verification: letter signed by the team asking to participate in the Olympic Games in Beijing; a documentary about the team called the Forbidden Team; team's tour in Europe (played two matches against FIFA teams), another article about participation in the Wild Cup. All sources meet WP:RS. --J.Mundo (talk) 13:28, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which of those sources provides any form of in-depth coverage of these players, or actually even confirms that any of them have ever taken to the field in a football match representing Tibet (which is the point Toon05 was making)? Only one seems to even mention them, and then only as signatories to a letter -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources are excellent sources - for the Tibet national football team, which already has an article which nobody is debating the validity or notability of. The players, however, as Chris says, are not covered in-depth by any of the sources you present, or any sources anybody has been able to provide. – Toon ^(talk) 14:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not one of those articles indicate that Passang Phuntsok has ever played for Tibet. The only time his name is mentioned is on the Tibet national sports association website with the indication that he was part of a team that toured Denmark in 2003. We don't know if he played a match and its unreasonable to assume that everyone named to the squad would have played (or even traveled to Denmark). I don't understand the value of such a speculative article. Jogurney (talk) 15:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those "excellent sources" are fair use in this discussion when the articles are about the players from the team. You can't expect individual discussions when this AfD is about multiple articles related to one notable topic.--J.Mundo (talk) 15:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)Well, the sources you need are ones which provide significant coverage of one or more of the players; this is basically to avoid the bureaucratic nomination of 20 players who are in exactly the same situation. If you can provide significant coverage of any of the players, we can remove them from this listing. This isn't anything against the Tibet national football team, just that the individual players aren't individually notable enough. – Toon ^(talk) 16:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : Well, there is actually another problem, it is that you are proposing here to suppress from wikipedia the only articles about Tibetans from the Category:Tibetan footballers, and the only Tibetan sportmen that are on this encyclopedia. As it can be noticed when reading the article on Tibet national football team, this team is not a minor one, and the issue of FIFA and international pressure has been discussed. For all these reasons, it seems a better choice to keep these articles on wikipedia, and request improving their notability, by adding a tag such as this one: { { Notability|date=January 2008 } } I suggest you to do so, and to restaure the already deleted Tenzin Tsering and adding the same tag.--Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 11:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason that the Keep side seem to argue is that this is an attempt at political censorship which is absolute nonsense. Can any of the editors who have voted keep provide at least one reason that is backed up with policy to keep the articles listed. I have searched for each of the listed players and I am unable to find anything to assert their notability. Are we to forget about policy just to placate a group of pro Tibetan editors who feel that deletion is an attack on the country of Tibet and political censorship. Why would we have AfD's if all we can do is add a notability tag to every article? I played football and I had my name mentioned in the papers in my country can I have an article too and just put a notability tag on top? BigDunc^Talk 12:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My keep is solely based on a common sense assumption of notability in Tibet, normal for players of any national team. I expect that somebody will turn up sources such as radio interviews, clandestinely circulated posters in Tibet, picture cards or picture books, you know, regular (but suppressed) fan behaviour. I would just expect it to take more time, than if this were available on the Internet. If somebody told me that this fan behaviour did not exist, my support would vanish. My concern is that lack of Google footprint for that region is but to be expected due the circumstances, and cannot be taken as evidence of lack of notability. How many Tibetan editors have participated in this debate? how many are there at all?; haven't seen them around here (except perhaps Rédacteur Tibet). Verifiability is a cornerstone indeed, my concern is time. My keep support is based on a perception of Tibet as an underdog, it's is not political, and they should not enjoy preferential treatment other than more time to present their merits, out of plain necessity. Power.corrupts (talk) 17:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your reasoning. The articles can easily be re-created when sources are found (if they are found). Jogurney (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that deletion is a last resort (Wikipedia:INTROTODELETE. The last resort is not re-creation. I wonder how editors would be alerted to the task and inclined to fix it, if the articles are deleted. Power.corrupts (talk) 07:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - you can't improve someone's notability. Notability is not a writing style or something which can be improved by adding some pictures; if a subject is not notable enough, there is not much that we can do to make them so. That tag indicates that an editor is concerned that the subject is not notable enough for an article. This is not an attempt to "suppress" anything, editors here are arguing from a nonpolitical standpoint; I'm sure that many - if not most - would agree with your political stance on Tibet, in fact. – Toon ^(talk) 12:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I meant improving the article by adding references, which is requesting time for editors. --Rédacteur Tibet (talk) 12:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete. None of these players play club football at a fully professional level, so they fail all WP:ATHLETE. None of these players are the subject of any meaningful third-party sources, so they all fail WP:BIO. None of these players have done anything of note, either inside or outside the world of football, so they all fail WP:N. None of these players' participation in the Tibet national football team cannot be verified, so they all fail WP:V (the references provided only indicate that they were selected into the squad but not whether they played or not). I would also like to re-emphasise the points made by BigDunc and Toon above - this AfD is NOT part of a anti-Tibet / deletionist conspiracy. How about assuming good faith? Bettia (rawr!) 14:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Deletionist rethoric. All articles state their references. Davin (talk) 20:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- - Please try to follow WP:AGF - this "deletionist" talk is totally uncalled for. Jogurney (talk) 21:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  ....none of which give any sort of in-depth coverage of the players concerned or actually confirm that they've ever taken to the field in a match representing Tibet -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If they are exiles of Tibet, maybe the people that actually live in Tibet don't know they exist! Ever thought of that? Govvy (talk) 20:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FTenzin_Tsering_and_WP:ATHLETE--J.Mundo (talk) 20:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not as interesting as Davin encouraging folk from the Dutch wikipedia to vote keep. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 21:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all There is nothing available to establish notability of the individual players, either as athletes or as icons in the Tibetan political struggle. We do not have a single source that discusses the biography of any of these players - only online sites listing them as members of the Tibet national team. As has been noted multiple times in the above discussion the Tibet national football team is clearly notable enough to merit a wikipedia article, but its member are not (at least yet). Abecedare (talk) 05:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite sure yet but if we don't keep then merge. I am sitting halfway between "weak delete" (where is the verification of notability, are they truly notable) and "weak keep" (they do represent their country albeit not recognised by FIFA or indeed many governments), with some concern about systematic bias. I would love to have more time to look deeper at this, particularly with the view that not all information is so readily available on the internet as it is in the Western world, but unfortunately don't this week, and suspect a decision will be made one way or the other before I do have time next week. Snippets suggest there is more there - not all in English. If there is no consensus to keep (or not kept as no-consensus) I propose a merge to something similar to List of minor EastEnders characters (1985) with the short bio of players all on a Tibet national football team squad page, leaving perhaps a redirect on individual players articles such that if/when they become acceptably notable they can get their own page. Basically, if not kept then merge (per User:ChildofMidnight) as a better alternative to delete (last resort per User:Power.corrupts). --ClubOranje^Talk 12:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For any mathers related to this subject I suggest that you contact office@tibetansports.org. The manager of the Tibetan National Football Association Mr. Kalsang Dhondup will be able to assist you on all details regarding to Tibetan football. Mr. Dhondup have been involved along the TNFA since it was established in 2000. Personally I know many of the players since I have been the International Coordinator for TNFA since 2000 but Im not able to identify ALL of the players. Good luck. Michael Nybrandt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.173.241.122 (talk) 14:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Nybrandt is the Dane involved with the creation of the Tibetan team, as mentioned in my earlier posting. I phoned him today if he had received my mail. I will now mail this association and point them to this page, requesting any evidence, that could demonstrate fan-activity etc. and support claims of notability amongst Tibetans. My involvement will likely end here, as my interest in football is limited to the European Championship and the World Cup, specifically the finals, and only when Denmark plays. Power.corrupts (talk) 18:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are you going to submit? A phone conversation? I don't think that would be such a good citation to add to each player bio. No one has been against a list, just individual player bio pages. Govvy (talk) 18:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent this request:

Sirs, There is currently a discussion on the English Wikipedia concerning the so-called notability of players on the Tibetan national football team. Some people would like that Wikipedia has a page for each of the players. But this is only possible if the players are considered notable, i.e. that the players are celebrities that enjoy the support and affection of the general public.

On the Internet, there is very little or perhaps no information at all, that the team should be particularly popular amongst the general Tibetan people, or enjoy the affection and admiration of fans, similar to the interest that players of other national teams commonly enjoy. There are two possible explanations. 1) either the players are not celebrities, or 2) they are celebrities, but Tibetans use other channels of communication than the Internet.

I wonder if you could help resolve this issue. It would not help much that YOU state that they are celebrities. According to the policy of Wikipedia, you would have to point to independent third party sources, that demonstrate celebrity status; for instance circulation of posters with team members, cards with player details (picture, age, goals scored) or something of the like. It would also have to be verifiable, enabling others to check the validity of the information, this is another of Wikipedia's policies. Please see the discussion at (this page). Please do not reply to me, but post your reply at the webpage. Power.corrupts (talk) 18:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the national team's "international co-ordinator" hasn't heard of some of the players, that's hardly a ringing endorsement of their notability..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Tamding Tsering. The rest I haven't looked at. Tsering is exactly the same as the Tenzin Tsering. None of the sources are particularly indepenent, all are trivial and none show he has actually played football. Fails Wp:N and WP:ATHLETE. Any of the rest which clearly fail the same criteria, should also be deleted. Those which may be less clearcut may need further detailed discussion. Peanut4 (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2009 (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.