Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Full 2014 FIFA World Cup qualifying table
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 20:53, 6 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 20:53, 6 February 2023 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. WP:MADEUP The Bushranger One ping only 01:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Full 2014 FIFA World Cup qualifying table (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Redundant of existing qualification pages. Additionally, comparison is on totally unequal grounds due to different qualifying methods in games played, etc. No indiction such a table is used in any form to meet GNG. Declined PROD, removed without comment. Ravendrop 21:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 15:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - as the article introduction states, this is an "imagined table" i.e. nothing but original research. GiantSnowman 15:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I absolutely love the idea of this, and would be delighted to see it continue to be updated... but somewhere else please. This is not notable and original research and therefore inappropriate here on two grounds. If you find another place to host it, please leave the url on my talk page, it's a fun idea. Sadly... delete. <sigh> --Dweller (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - as already stated, this article is obvious case of WP:OR. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Original research. Argyle 4 Lifetalk 15:33, 28 September 2011 (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.