Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013–14 Darlington 1883 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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:29, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

2013–14 Darlington 1883 season

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Season article for a club outside of The Football League that's not notable in my opinion. JMHamo (talk) 21:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 21:17, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and previous consensus here and here, amongst many others. If it's not a team in a fully-pro league (i.e. outside of the Football League in England) then it does not merit a season article. GiantSnowman 21:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep I welcome the debate on this subject, I don't want to argue what is notable and what isn't, but in the case of Darlington 1883, Chester F.C. and even F.C. Halifax Town are notable teams, while there may have name changes in all those examples, in the eyes of everybody, including the FA and National League System, they are normally deemed the spiritual successor to the club before them, and most of the time lay claim to the history of those before them, so this evolved from something notable if things like this is deemed not notable, then do we go ahead and nominate League season articles that is under the Conference National, I am relatively new to wikipedia myself, so I am still learning about lots of things here, thats my tuppence worth on the subjectdfcfozz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:46, 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 should be haivng anything more detailed like a seasonal article. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:48, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I take the point, but surely keeping it and similar articles can only be a good thing, keep them and they can in time become a handy place to source from in future for staticians and fans alike dfcfozz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add further comments, but do not !vote more than once -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom, club does not play at a level anywhere near high enough to satisfy WP:NSEASONS. Argument to keep as outlined above contravenes WP:NOT. Fenix down (talk) 08:43, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - the consensus has always been that the cut-off point for season articles are Conference National, and the AfD's GiantSnowman links to above is for clubs that play below the fifth tier of the English league system. Mentoz86 (talk) 22:56, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - this club was playing below the fifth tier during this season, so my arguments isn't valid.Mentoz86 (talk) 23:08, 28 August 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.