Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009–10 Grays Athletic 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.  MBisanz  talk 18:28, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

2009–10 Grays Athletic F.C. season

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article previously deleted by prod with the following rationale: "Fails WP:NSEASONS. Recent AfDs have resulted in these articles being deleted." Restored to userspace on the understanding that additional work would be done to meet GNG. No changes have been made with the article moved directly to mainspace. The original concern remains. Despite the fact that there are a large number of references in the article, they fall into three categories essentially, none of which are suitable for GNG:

1. References from Grays Athletic or other competing football clubs websites - primary sources, not independent coverage.

2. References that only tangentially mention the club and provide no significant coverage of their season as a subject in itself.

3. References to routine match reporting, the sort that long standing consensus holds are not sufficient for GNG simply because they can be found for a vast number of minor teams across local media.

This is essentially an utterly unremarkable season for a club playing in the fifth tier of English football. The 2015 and 2014 deletion archives can be readily browsed for numerous examples of AfDs that have established the consensus per WP:NSEASONS that season articles for clubs not playing in top professional leagues are inherently not notable. As a few examples, please see:

1. Multiple FC United of Manchester seasons

2. Multiple minor German club seasons

3. More German club seasons

4. FC Guernsey

5. Aldershot Town

6. Hyde FC

7. Forfar Athletic

8. Barcelona B

9. The New Saints

Fenix down (talk) 10:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Fenix down (talk) 10:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:NSEASONS as they were not in a professional league that year; fails WP:GNG per nom. -  Yellow Dingo &#160; (talk)  14:53, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually they were professional that year, and were since the Conference South was formed. Clearly a lazy editor who hasn't done his research and !voted on a whim, as they were also the only club from the Isthmian League to ever go fully professional in the season preceding the Conference South. --Jimbo[online] 18:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * He didn't say Grays weren't professional, he said they weren't in a professional league, which make your insults look even more misguided. Number   5  7  20:24, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I have previously asked Fenix down what makes articles such as 2009–10 Mansfield Town F.C. season or 2009–10 Newport County A.F.C. season, plus those that of seasons before and after, from the same level any less significant or notable? I find it odd that he's targeted one out of many and doesn't proceed with deletion for those that are significantly less sourced or barely just lists of events of chronological events. I'd say relegation was pretty remarkable, especially compared to those of mid-table obscurity that are barely sourced or have little to no prose. I haven't had the time to re-source the article. Doesn't deleting an article rather than marking it for improvement goes against Wiki ethics and standards? --Jimbo[online] 17:02, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Clearly fails WP:NSEASONS, and whilst it's well referenced, I don't see anything in there that's beyond WP:ROUTINE match reports, club news or transfer deals. Realistically Grays have never been higher than the Conference, so it would set an extremely bad precedent to allow this article to stand. In response to Jimbo's comments above, my opinion is that those articles should be deleted too and their existence does not provide a rationale for this one to exist (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS only works as a positive reason if the entire article set is present – but non-league season articles are the exception rather than the rule). In answer to the question asked: No, otherwise we'd never delete anything. Plus, as Fenix says, it was put into your userspace to improve and you moved it back without bothering – not having time isn't really an excuse because no-one was forcing you to move it back into the mainspace so quickly. Number   5  7  17:09, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 17:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:NSEASONS and WP:GNG -  Yellow Dingo &#160; (talk)  09:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep going to go against the grain here. Clubs at Conference Premier/National League level receive much the same level of coverage to that of many Football League clubs, from both national and local media.  I believe the article already demonstrates ample evidence of WP:GNG being met.  Also, we should bear in mind that WP:NSEASONS is not sport specific, and I'm not sure how people are applying it to this AfD.  I mean, how is this article different to, say, 2009–10 Northampton Town F.C. season, in the eyes of WP:NSEASONS?  None of the five bullet points seem to apply in any way to an association football club season. Mattythewhite (talk) 13:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as still nothing suggesting enough for a convincing independent article. SwisterTwister   talk  04:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.