Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Hayes (footballer)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Hayes (footballer)

[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)

Does not meet WP:GNG. Coverage is largely limited to press releases put out by teams; there is one example of brief coverage by the BBC (regarding Hayes signing to Ipswich), but it provides almost no independent coverage of the subject beyond that detail. Searching online, there may be an Australian-rules footballer by this name that is notable, but the English Hayes does not appear to meet notability guidelines. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:55, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and England. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:55, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep for me, I feel it's fine the article with the citations a little more other stuff online. Govvy (talk) 23:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 12:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, all available sources appear to be fleeting mentions and/or stats and transaction info. Player has not made any appearances above National League level. LizardJr8 (talk) 19:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fifth-tier footballer lacking significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. All coverage is really fleeting mentions, nothing substantial. AusLondonder (talk) 23:54, 18 February 2024 (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.