User talk:Teratix/AFL Tables

Notability
I see that someone has added the WP:GNG template to this page. It would be quite concerning if AFL Tables was considered not notable given it has more than 13,500 mentions of it across the English Wikipedia, not to mention existing templates for players, coaches and umpires. It has also had a Wikidata entry since 2015.


 * As explained in the article, it is used as the de facto source of truth for not only this Wikipedia, but also much of the Australian sports media, and at times the league itself
 * It has also been cited in books, theses,and websites (where the Australian Broadcasting Corporation – yes, the ABC – describes AFL Tables as "the much relied upon yet unofficial source").
 * AFL Tables is the only other website (alongside the Australian Football League's official website itself) to be listed on the State Library of Victoria's research guide to Australian rules football.

It is, by most measures, notable. How these sources and references can be incorporated into the article I am currently unsure, but it surely serves as a reminder of the site's importance and relevance on Wikipedia. Gibbsyspin 00:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree with the tagger. You need cites which discuss/describe the website as a topic to meet GNG, not just cites that demonstrate it exists and gets used. If this survived an AfD I'd be surprised. Aspirex (talk) 11:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)