Deletion of Vitor Coutinho Flora

Comment: Passes  has played for Botafogo Futebol Clube (SP)|Botafogo-SP by playing in the  Campeonato Paulista|Campeonato Paulista Série A1  a |fully professional league as per http://int.soccerway.com/matches/2012/01/22/brazil/paulista-a1/sao-paulo-futebol-clube/botafogo-futebol-clube-ribeirao-preto/1223339/ this.He has played in  Latvia top league  for FK Daugava (2003)|FK Daugava Rīga  in the 2014 Latvian Higher League and also played  in the UEFA Europa League against Aberdeen F.C. as per http://int.soccerway.com/matches/2014/07/03/europe/uefa-cup/aberdeen-fc/fk-jurmala/1710385/ this and http://int.soccerway.com/matches/2014/07/10/europe/uefa-cup/fk-jurmala/aberdeen-fc/1710387/ this .Now if he  was retired or injured ,I may have agreed but the subject is only 25  and has a had decent career including playing in the top tier of  Latvian Football with a couple of International  cup appearances and in lower divisions in Brazil
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTBALL||WP:FPL)

Comment: comprehensively fails ; clear consensus at AFD that scraping through  is not enough
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NFOOTBALL)

Comment: This young player does meet , and still has a long career ahead of him. The "examples" of other cases where the article has been deleted are not comparable, as noted above
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTBALL)

Comment: per nom. Given that this article fails  comprehensively and only barely passes , it falls under the clause in that guidelines lede that says ''the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article '''must''' be kept.'' (Emphasis original
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NSPORT)

Comment: Qualifies for  as having played a match in a professional league, and having also played in the UEFA Europa League which is a professional tournament
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFOOTBALL)

Comment: Passing , no matter how slim the margin, gives the subject of an article a presumption of notability.  That shifts the burden to the editors that think the article should be deleted (if such a shift didn't occur, then there would be no point to SNGs).  While it is impossible to prove a negative (i.e., that sources don't exist), editors wanting deletion must do more work than a mere 5 minute Google search - they must show that a full effort was made to find sources.  In view of , it would be challenging for English speaking editors that do not live in Brasil or Latvia to truly evaluate sources.  This differs, for example, from the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Sinclair (footballer born 1991)|Scott Sinclair (referenced above) where it is a lot easier for English speakers to try and find sources.  Unless multiple editors fluent in Portuguese and Latvian perform truly detailed searches (more than the first few pages from Google), then I don't think the presumption is invalidated and we presume  is met.  Again, the community has set  and we should respect the standard they set until shown in this case the standard is not valid
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSPORT||WP:BIAS||WP:GNG||WP:NFOOTY)