Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011–12 Eastleigh F.C. season (2nd nomination)


 * 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. (was nominated in another AFD closed as delete, consensus is clear on both) Secret account 02:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

2011–12 Eastleigh F.C. season
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

2nd nomination - Season article for a club outside of The Football League that's not notable in my opinion. JMHamo (talk) 11:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - see my comments on 2013-14. Bringing in the concept of whether an article is notable or not is questionable, given that I am sure many of the non-Manchester United fans may not consider the 2013-14 Man Utd page as noteable. Wikpedia is there to provide information, regardless of whether certain people deem that information significant or not. I'm sure we could easily find many articles on Wikipedia, which have less information on than this nominated page, which are not up for deletion, yet are less "noteable". User:GrimReaper66 12:57, 25 August 2013 (GMT)
 * Keep - firstly GrimReaper66's arguments to 'keep' are extremely poor, and comparing Man Utd with Eastleigh is laughable. While season articles on clubs outside of the Football League are normally non-notable, this particular article/season does seem to meet GNG with its well-sourced prose. Needs cleaning up though. GiantSnowman 12:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "does seem to meet GNG with its well-sourced prose" But most of this is just from their own website. There are one or two other refs about results, but doesn't this all equate to WP:ROUTINE? Yes, the season happened, but WHY is this season for a non-league club notable?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 13:39, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - I hate to be a deletionist, but I'm pretty sure there's no reason to have season articles for clubs outside The Football League. I don't think the sourcing in this article is appropriate either, since most of the references are to the club's own website. – PeeJay 15:38, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete -- The club may be sufficiently notable to have an article, but only teams in the top 4 (fully professional) leagues/divisions (i.e. below Football League) should be having anything more detailed like a seasonal article. This is in Conference South, which is one or two divisions further down.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom, club does not play at a level anywhere near high enough to satisfy WP:NSEASONS. Disagree with GS comments, most of the references are from the Eastleigh FC blog. Agree this is a much better quality article than many season articles, but this is still an article on a mediocre mid table finish with no significant events occurring and no indication that there has been significant reporting of the season outside of WP:ROUTINE. Fenix down (talk) 08:58, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - my opinion has not changed since the previous AfD one year ago - this subject passes WP:GNG, even if the clubs plays in the "wrong" league. Mentoz86 (talk) 23:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Can you explain how this article passes GNG? I accept that this is a well written article with a lot of sourced prose however, of the 119 references, only 9 of them come from an essentially non-primary source (basically local newspapers) and 5 come from the league website. The remainder are all from the clubs own blog. There is nothing in this article to indicate that this mid-table finish attracted any significant coverage outside of the club beyond routine. Fenix down (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Season articles should only be allowed for clubs in fully pro leagues. Number   5  7  22:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - take away references from the cub's website and WP:ROUTINE coverage and nothing is left. There is no reliable source that has written about this club's season. Fails WP:GNG. The Whispering Wind (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2013 (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.