Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 association football domestic cup champions


 * 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 2011 association football domestic cup champions, keep 2011 in UEFA. Fenix down (talk) 05:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

2011 association football domestic cup champions

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page should be deleted as it is basically useless and it's already covered by 2011 in association football. Plus, there are no other lists like it for other years KingSkyLord (talk) 23:41, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am also nominating the following related pages because they are also pretty useless and they aren't worked on or improved heavily:


 * KingSkyLord (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)


 * These two articles shouldn't be bundled, the original appears to be WP:OR but the second one seems to be a classic case of how WP:USELESS is an argument to avoid at AfD. SportingFlyer  T · C  05:36, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete 2011 association football domestic cup champions but keep 2011 in UEFA. GiantSnowman 07:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete the former, keep the latter, not least because no policy-based reason for deletion has been given -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete the inital page but why are people wanting to keeping the 2011 in UEFA page as that is the only one of it's kind. HawkAussie (talk) 06:25, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Pushing back against a "useless" nomination, really. There's nothing wrong with that page as an outline, except possibly for the fact it's not part of a larger set. SportingFlyer  T · C  08:09, 30 July 2019 (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.