Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uppermill Football Club
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. - Mailer Diablo 07:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Uppermill Football Club[edit]
Football (soccer) team that competes at level 13 14 of the English football league system. Established consensus on WikiProject Football is that only teams from levels 1-10 are considered inherently notable. Article was previously prodded but original author disputed it on the grounds of it being a grassroots club that was notable on a local scale; it being notable only on a local scale is exactly why it should be deleted from Wikipedia. Qwghlm 09:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as nominator. Qwghlm 09:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete looks like it is at level 14. feydey 09:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per nom. aLii 09:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. -- Alias Flood 19:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. Alias Flood 20:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete — Per nom Martinp23 20:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Per nom. - Pal 17:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Qwghlm - That is a selective synopsis of my argument and you lower youself by its use. You are a typical premier league team fan - You have no concept of grassroots football.
- Strong Keep The question we have to ask here is whether the information presented in this article is verifiable. It is. The official website for this club is here. Secondly, the subject in question has achieved sufficient external notice to ensure that it can be covered from a neutral point of view based on verifiable information from reliable sources, without straying into original research as well. I view that this article should remain. Its relative obscurity does not make it unencyclopedic. Moreover, the lack of "notability" is not a criterion for deletion, because this isn't specifically stated in the deletion policy. If we began to delate this article, i am afraid that this would set a presedence in the way no-league football clubs are being delt with on Wikipedia. On top of this, this article in question is part of WikiProject Non-league football! --Siva1979Talk to me 18:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I am intending to offer a compromise. Those clubs which can be verified within the English football league system should be included. That means those clubs which have their own websites should be included here. The reason is clear. All clubs within the English football league system in the lower divisions have the potential to be promoted to step 1 of the National League System.
- No, sorry I don't think you're right here. The fact they have a website is neither here nor there, and in fact we should be looking at third-party sources for verifiability, not ones published by the organisation itself. I think the level 10 minimum as a standard of notability is fairly generous myself, wouldn't have argued if the bar had been set a bit higher, and I'm a BIG fan of non-league. Consequently, Delete. As for setting a precedent - Yes. That's what happens when a consensus of notability is taken into account. Clubs who don't, or who haven't in the past, played at Level 10 or higher are going to get votes here to Delete. - fchd 20:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- But there must be exceptions to this. For example on the talk page of this article, there is an engaging argument to keep this article. --Siva1979Talk to me 20:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- No, sorry I don't think you're right here. The fact they have a website is neither here nor there, and in fact we should be looking at third-party sources for verifiability, not ones published by the organisation itself. I think the level 10 minimum as a standard of notability is fairly generous myself, wouldn't have argued if the bar had been set a bit higher, and I'm a BIG fan of non-league. Consequently, Delete. As for setting a precedent - Yes. That's what happens when a consensus of notability is taken into account. Clubs who don't, or who haven't in the past, played at Level 10 or higher are going to get votes here to Delete. - fchd 20:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There has to be a cutoff point, and this is well below it. --kingboyk 20:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Alright. Can the cutoff point be at level 11 (or step 7) at the very least? The reason why I propose this is because step 7 (or level 11) clubs are members of the National League System. One must take note that this article is part of WikiProject Non-league football. --Siva1979Talk to me 21:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football, especially When is a club notable?, may prove helpful for reference purposes and continued debate. Alias Flood 22:08, 19 August 2006 (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.