Talk:Leek RUFC

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... It was widely established, and accepted, many years ago that any English rugby union club which plays, or has played, at level 5 or above is notable enough to have its own article. Leek is now playing at that level and this is why I created the article. Rillington (talk) 01:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, . I tagged for speedy deletion due to notability because there's no significant coverage by independent sources, it doesn't meet any notability guidelines in Notability (sports), and nor does it meet any specific notability guidelines listed at WikiProject Rugby union/Notability. If you can point me towards the agreement you mention, that'd be appreciated. Cheers, Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:12, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Just to add - I'm not a deletionist; a compromise may be to move the article to draft space, until it has been expanded? Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. I hope that you will not take offence at my reply but I am obviously going to be somewhat irritated that you have chosen to come after this article, and by default, many others as well. However, emotion will not play any part in my defence of your desire to get this article speedily deleted. I have no idea if you are a deletionist, but I do find this to be extremely disruptive, and for many different reasons, which I will now explain.


 * Firstly, a speedy deletion is a tool that should not be used lightly. Therefore, to use it for an article such as this is disruptive in itself, and arguably an inappropriate use of this tool.


 * Second, you are forcing me to spend significant time on this and this takes time away from other efforts that I make on Wikipedia. This disrupts my own efforts to improve Wikipedia and is therefore disruptive in itself. This isn't an emotional statement but is a statement of fact


 * Third, you will see dozens of other articles about tier 5 teams which follow a similar tack, and every one of these articles has been accepted after review, with no issues about notability or lack of independent references, and I have been creating these articles since 2012, doing so after seeing other such articles on teams at this level, created before 2012 by other Wikipedians. Therefore, it is clear that there is a consensus that a team reaching tier 5 in English club rugby is the level required for notability on Wikipedia.


 * Fourth, you seem to have taken a snap, unilateral, decision to simply get this deleted rater than making any effort to improve the article. I would argue that this in itself could be seen as deletionist, as well as being disruptive, and to do so in such a ferocious manner by wanting a speedy deletion.


 * I hope that you do not consider this reply to be disrespectful to you. This is a robust defence of more than a decade of effort to try to expand coverage of English rugby union on Wikipedia, and when someone effectively comes after than a decade of efforts, one is going to be robust in one's defence of countless hours of effort and I'm sure you would have been just as robust if the tables had been turned. Rillington (talk) 01:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Absolutely,, and genuinely no offence taken! I tagged the page as part of working the New Pages Patrol, following the procedures there. This includes a notability check, and as I indicated, neither the general notability guidelines for sports teams, nor the specific ones for Rugby Union teams indicate that English tier 5 teams are notable. If there is consensus for their inclusion (and if there are dozens of other articles on Tier 5 teams, then there obviously is), then the best solution would be to have the Rugby Union project update the notability guidelines to reflect that. Cheers, Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 12:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your further replies and for removing the speedy deletion request. And yes I think that updating the Rugby Union teams notability guideline would be the way to go as this level has been the accepted norm for more than a decade. Rillington (talk) 06:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I think that if more sources are added to the article other than those at England rugby (e.g. independent of source) then I see no reason but to keep the article as the rugby team is at the fifth tier of the rugby union league system and one of the premier rugby clubs in Staffordshire. Jgjsmith006 20:22, 8 January 2024 (UTC)