Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010–11 Hyde 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. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  00:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

2010–11 Hyde F.C. season

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Originally proposed deletion via PROD with the following reason:

As agreed here and confirmed here, clubs lower than the Conference National are deemed below the notability threshold for season articles.

User:Liamtaylor007 contested prod with the following reason:

i think it is a suitable page and therefor [sic] should not get deleted, why should it get deleted, does it matter if its not a notable team. — Half  Price  15:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. — Half  Price  15:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - not a notable season. GiantSnowman 15:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. This article does not meet the includsion criteria for season articles. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Even ignoring the consensus for these type of articles for a second, most of the sources are to the club's own websites and the others are just transfer news. However, I want to also note that the creator and sole editor is just 15 years old as shown on his user page, and the juxtaposition of the two rationales, though totally standard, looks a bit mean in this case, along with the sic tag. Christopher Connor (talk) 20:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Fair comment. I think it was right to list both the reason and the contest, but the sic probably was a tad harsh! — Half  Price  22:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * What has the article creator's age got to do with anything? And besides, can't 15 year olds spell nowadays?  Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete and Comment. Delete per "sources are to the club's own websites and the others are just transfer news", which just falls under WP:V and WP:ROUTINE, respectively. However, we've had issues like this before that were kept because the club formerly played at a professional, national level of competition, but I'm still not sure I understand why that distinction matters. The conversation in the first link provided by Half Price, WT:WikiProject Football/Season article task force/Archive 1, doesn't provide a clear conclusion, and WP:FOOTY/SEASONS has never published even a recommended notability criteria or competition threshold for season articles. For example, one of the two examples provided in Half Price's second link, WT:WikiProject Football/Season article task force, is Newport County A.F.C., who are currently playing at a national level for the first time since they were expelled from the Football Conference in 1988–89&mdash;see the list of Newport County A.F.C. seasons for an overview&mdash;but they have a season article for all 21 seasons between. Because of cases like this, I feel that FOOTY's policy and implementation in regards to notable seasons is rather flimsy. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 14:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable season. --Carioca (talk) 22:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with much of what Johnny Polo says above. Whilst I can see some debate has already occurred on this, and it's not sensible to keep re-opening a full debate each time an issue comes up, I can't help feeling that going with a cut-off of Conference National is a bit arbitrary. Surely it's down to the sources available e.g. would AFC Wimbledon's last season in Conference South not have gained more coverage than some teams in League Two? Eldumpo (talk) 10:59, 10 October 2010 (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.