Deletion of Youssef Barakat

Comment: Lebanese Premier League 2005-06 "The 2005-06 Season of the Lebanese Premier League was the 58th season of Top-Flight ''Professional'' League Football (soccer) in Lebanon." - opening sentence of the article (my emphasis). Just because it isn't supported by sources now, does not mean that the article should be deleted.  My rationale for the assertion that sources are likely to exist is simple: whatever its other attributes, this would appear without doubt to be the top football/soccer league in Lebanon, and one would therefore assume that there is Lebanese media coverage out there regarding the league. The fact that we have so far been unable to find this coverage, that it isn't readily findable using Google, or that it isn't in English don't matter. We have plenty of articles which only or predominantly cite offline sources - perhaps if there are any Lebanese users active on enwiki we could ask them? (although perhaps that is better left to  rather than an Afd discussion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Cleanup (WP:CLEANUP)

Comment: even if sources were theoretically available, we cannot speculate on their contents. We cannot assume that they prove either side of the argument, and since our core |verifiability policy clearly states that ''"If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it."'' we cannot keep an article just in case sources exist and happen to back up the stance. It is not whether sources exist somewhere, it is whether they have been found. It is clearly not acceptable to keep an article because there "may" be reliable sources out there that prove notability and back up the assertions made here. What it comes down to is there are no reliable sources present, or have been found by the several users who have looked, to back up the LPL being fully-professional. Given that this is a |living person's biography, which can do significant damage to someone's life if some unsourced claims are inserted (which is very likely given WP's current practices), the probably-not-notable should not be kept unless there is actual evidence that they meet our inclusion criteria — which we just don't have. –&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:BLP)

Comment: can you please point me to where our article states that it is fully pro? I even did a search for the words "pro" and "professional" and it didn't pop up... am I being stupid? Plus,  is a core policy - if you think that "sources are likely to exist" could you perhaps present some? We have looked and can't find any, so I don't know what your assumption is based on. –&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: The previous editor seems to be confusing |verifiability and |notability. The question, as far as verifiability is concerned, is not whether "there are no reliable sources present, or have been found by the several users who have looked, to back up the LPL being fully-professional": it is whether such sources exist to verify the article content.  erifiability|Verifiability means verifiability of the article content, not verifiability of |notability. The question of whether the Lebanese league is professional or not doesn't have any bearing on the fact that the contents of the article are verifiable, which is the standard for both  and . Please don't let start treating the verifiability and living persons content policies as somehow subservient to the notability guidelines, which are about whether such content should go into a separate article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:V||WP:BLP||WP:verifiability||WP:notability||WP:notability)

Comment: Clearly fails  and . No evidence he has played in a pro-league so not notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE||WP:BIO)