Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012–13 Macclesfield Town F.C. season

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, taking into account the comments that redirecting doesn't make much sense as this is a rather unlikely search term. No objection to anyone making this redirect anyway if people feel that it would be helpful after all. Fram (talk) 14:03, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2012–13 Macclesfield Town F.C. season

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Season articles for clubs outside of the Football League are not generally considered notable, and I can see no evidence why this is any different. Giant Snowman 21:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 21:57, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked through the season templates for the past few years there are a large volumes of season pages about conference national sides. Also Macclesfield Town are a notable club who have played at various levels throughout the years and if there other season and the club as well are considered notable historically then relegation makes no difference in my view. I personally considered this level ok but no lower but never really though about it. Are there precedents for deletion of season articles at this level or guidelines for notability of season articles within the project other than GNG which i would argue is subjective and possible at this level.Blethering Scot 22:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Secondly, it does fail WP:GNG, which is vital. Thirdly, consensus at AFD can be found here and here, amongst many others. Also have a read of WP:NSEASONS for more info. Giant Snowman 22:16, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Otherstuff exists is a mute argument so lets not even go there and its always a sidetrack attempt. My main primary concern is have you attempted to source the page to prove that it wont meet GNG becacaus i suspect this hasnt been explored fully. Also Colwyn Bay were not a conference national team nor were chester and in fact in the chester one it was stated by a user that the conference national was the cut off which was my belief also.Blethering Scot 22:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the parent club's article. In this AfD from August 2012, the nominator stated that the cut-off point is Conference National, and if that is correct this article is about a notable subject and shouldn't be deleted. However, the AfD I linked to was closed as "no consensus" due to having a well-sourced prose. As WP:NSEASONS states that we should redirect season-articles without a well-sources prose to the parent article, this article should be redirected to Macclesfield Town F.C.. Mentoz86 (talk) 05:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - as per Mentoz. in addition, NSEASONS leans towards the view that season articles should be reserved for teams playing in a country's top league. Although this is not set out as a hard and fast rule, it makes sense to me. Fenix down (talk) 10:17, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The state of the articles i.e. missing a full prose is not a reason for an AFD. The only valid reason would be notability or policy and i dont believe an attempt was made to see if this could be made to meet GNG and im fairly sure it can but thats not my job thats the nominator's to check. Mentoz86 the AFDs linked to so far either all have set the conference national as the bar or are below that level, and i am yet to see evidence to the contrary. It should be noted that if this AFD success and i don't have a personal affiliation or view re it i will be nominating all season articles at this level which there are a very large volume that hasnt been nominated prior to this and i suspect that is because the bar wasn't set at this level previously but lower.Blethering Scot 12:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - My comment is about the requirements of NSEASONS, there is no way that the fifth teir of any competition could be described as a "top professional league". In addition there is nothing notable about this mid-table performance, so it would seem the GNG check has been done and this article has failed. Fenix down (talk) 08:42, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -Not only is Macclesfield Town a notable club who have played at notable levels i believe that this could be made to meet GNG and an attempt should of been done by the nominator to do so not simply it doesn't meet GNG in its current state. AFD's arent for the state it is in so i believe the above two redirect votes arent valid as notability is what AFD is for not state of article. On top of that evidence provided indicates that the conference national was the level at which season articles were allowed and the AFD's that the nom and one other provided were either for teams lower than that and in fact mention conference national as that bar.Blethering Scot 12:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The closing admin is required to read the comments behind the bolded votes, and when s/he does they'll realize that I'm opposed to deleting this article (unless I forgot a "not"), because it is on a notable topic, but that I'm suggesting it be redirected to the parent article until someone writes a well-sourced prose. Mentoz86 (talk) 22:54, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Season articles should follow the same notability guidelines as players - e.g. fully pro leagues only. Number 5 7 13:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Got to have a cut-off point and this club fails notability by not being in The Football League in my opinion. JMHamo (talk) 12:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Club is not in a fully professional league,and the season article has no special reason to be an exception of WP:NSEASONS.L smll 03:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't see the value in redirecting. It's a very unlikely search term: no one is going to search "2012–13 Macclesfield Town F.C. season" for general information on the club, and focusing on last season is going to be WP:UNDUE/WP:RECENTISM anyway. --BDD (talk) 21:14, 30 August 2013 (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.