Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niall Geany

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. Goldsztajn (talk) 10:07, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Niall Geany

[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)

He fails GNG and lacks SIGCOV. The conviction doesn't make him pass any of the perpetrator criteria. Stories about it are routine court reporting. Article is in an appalling state and would need rewriting if kept. Dougal18 (talk) 08:41, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Crime, Football, and Scotland. jolielover♥talk 09:11, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG. Wikipedia is not a news outlet and the only thing this guy seems to be at all notable for is being convicted of a crime which, appalling as it is, does not meet the threshold for an article in and of itself. Simply being on the books of a low level football club also does not warrant an article. Weirdly written so if it is kept it will need gutting and putting into coherent form. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 10:46, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Looking at WP:NSPORTS, I was rather surprised that there isn't a specific guideline for football, that's an issue in itself. However it is possible that having played in the Scottish Football League, a professional league, could make him inherently notable anyway. Also, this case has generated a significant amount of coverage in Scotland, I can produce links to show it. If the article is in poor shape that's an argument for improving it, not deleting it. PatGallacher (talk) 14:27, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NFOOTBALL was abolished in 2022. If you have "significant coverage", please show it. Giant Snowman 08:21, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E. No, the idea of inherent notability for footballers has been tried before, but was scrapped in 2022. Geschichte (talk) 15:23, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are a fair few news stories about the incident, although it's appears to be BLP1E event, there maybe some meat on the bone. I am on the fence myself. I honestly don't have anything against the article, it's straight forward and to the point. It could pass WP:BASIC, but again, the article needs improvement to show better sources. Govvy (talk) 16:18, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:19, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. Giant Snowman 08:22, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notability is clearly not there Coldupnorth (talk) 08:22, 14 October 2025 (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.