Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IFFHS World's Best Goalkeeper (2nd nomination)
and '''salt''' but '''Oppose G4''' - G4'ing this is just going to buy us more time-wasting pain when such a deletion inevitably ends up at . There are "sources" where previously none existed which calls into question any suggestion that the article is ''"sufficiently identical and unimproved"''. We should debate the validity of those sources here, sure, but I don't think G4 is a good idea. On the article itself, a simplified list article - ''winners of the ...'' - might serve to support the parent article in a functional sense, with the award itself explained in the parent organisation article. But an article about the award itself doesn't seem justified. That is, without substantially improved sources. Most of them seem to be coverage of individuals who have won the award in question. There are plenty of notable organisations that give awards to notable people. The organisations are notable, the people are notable but the awards aren't really notable in their own right, in my opinion, unless they have received significant coverage in their own right
— [[User: Stalwart111|'''Stalwart''']][[User talk:Stalwart111|'''111''']], 22:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:DRV (Wikipedia:Deletion policy)