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. 20:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Seven year old child who is allegedly being courted by all manner of top football clubs. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, it will be approximately ten years before he plays a professional match assuming he even makes it that far.... ChrisTheDude 09:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. ChrisTheDude 09:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nominator ChrisTheDude 09:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 'cause you're only a wikizealot destroyer of all top-youngsters' articles. --necronudist 10:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Firstly, no I'm not (please be civil) and secondly, you can't vote that an article be kept solely on the grounds that you have a personal issue with me..... ChrisTheDude 10:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep He has been written about by numerous non-trivial third parties ([1], [2], [3], etc.), and I think the notability comes not as much from what he will do (which would be crystal balling) but from what the football clubs are doing about him (which is current), but I'm not adamant about it. --Charlene 10:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep too, as per Charlene. - jlao ⁰⁴ 11:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOT and WP:BIO. HornetMike 14:04, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per HornetMike. It is just plain silly to include a seven year old because he is predicted to be something, and then eventually delete his article when he gets older if he didn't become that something. – Elisson • T • C • 15:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete - its the silly season for child prospects. In these days of YouTube it is easy to get press coverage for a clever kid. Interest from big clubs is routine who vie to sign up alll sorts of kids as an insurance policy. Whether they make it is another matter. Fails WP:BIO. BlueValour 17:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete - WP:BIO, WP:NOT a crystal ball. A seven year old? Next we'll be having talented football foetuses with their own articles. Stop the madness, now. Qwghlm 21:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per nom. There are no citations in the article at all. --ElKevbo 23:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I would be inclined to change my "vote" to "Weak keep" if someone, anyone, were to show the least bit of initiative and add the above-cited references to the article. That no one has done so bodes ill for the future of this article and its maintenance. --ElKevbo 01:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Adequate (but very poorly formatted) sources have been added to convince me this meets WP:BIO. --ElKevbo 05:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. --Kf4bdy ^{talk contribs} 23:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete simply because theres no citations? its obvious that theres mainstream sources so theoretically the article can be improved. User:Portillo

• Weak Keep. This is not the only uncitated article in Wikipedia! So, this argument does not convince me. And I agree that the fact he is just a kid is problematic. But he is indeed a "notable kid"! As another user said, "notability comes not as much from what he will do (which would be crystal balling) but from what the football clubs are doing about him (which is current)". A person can be notable of what others are doing for him not just of what he actually accomplishes!--Yannismarou 10:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• My "vote" to delete was not based on the lack of citations. Rather, it was based on a lack of any assertions of noteability (as evidenced by a complete lack of citations). I note with interest that despite this discussion there are still no references in the article. I agree with those who assert that the youth of the subject is a non-issue and an extremely poor reason to delete the article. Lack of noteability is a very valid reason, however, and the one on which I have based my "vote." --ElKevbo 01:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per BlueValour. -- Bpmullins 13:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete: He is a kid! He has not played a professional game. He may be the next Pele, but until he actually plays a professional game he is simply not notable. -- MLD · T · C · @:  15:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP: as per Yannismarou & Charlene. Many third party sources listed here! Flibirigit 00:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I simply dont see the logic. Football players on wikipedia do not neccesarily have to be professionals, think about it, the article list of child prodigys contains panos and juan carlos chera why? because they are sporting prodigys simple as that [4] portillo

• Showing early skills doesn't make him a child prodigy in football - succesful footballers have much more - stamina, positioning, tactical awareness, speed etc. It is only in years to come that we will know if he also has these. BlueValour 03:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• But the reason he is a child football prodigy is because HE IS a child football prodigy, what do you think man u, barcelona and all these did with the video of juan chera? they obviously showed it to their high performance staff, or their youth development staff, its already been proven that he is a prodigy and i think its wrong for wiki to go against this, as you know the times, guardian, usa today and lots of other mainstream articles have mentioned already. portillo

• Keep Another footballing prodigy, should keep since he is a child prodigy like so many others who are child prodigies in other fields. Kurt000 13:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete as per successful AfD process on Paolo Maldini's 9-years-old son. Should you decide to keep this article, you would definitely contradict yourself. --Angelo 00:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

^ No because maldinis son is not famous for being a good player, he is famous for he is maldinis son. Maradona has a son playing for napoli, doesnt mean he is notable. juan chera and panos is not the same situation as maldini jr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Portillo (talk • contribs)

• • Comment for what I can know, tomorrow this kid could wake up and decide football is not that attracting, and switch to an engineering career. As well as Maldini's son, he's a crystal ball. --Angelo 12:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• The reports from newspapers and sports broadcasters are representative of the media interest about Panos. You are missing the point that he is notable for what others have said or done about him, rather that what he has done, or may do himself. Flibirigit 13:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Very Weak Keep. I had never heard of him, but it seems the media has. Notable for what he is, but not the footballer that he might become. aLii 16:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, as per above. He's not notable for what he might become but notable for what he is, which is a 7 year old boy who has attracted media attention and the interest of a hosts of clubs wanting to sign him. Englishrose 23:39, 6 November 2006 (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.