Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Palestine International Championship


 * 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   keep. The only compelling argument here is made by User:Nfitz, who presents sources showing that this event meets the WP:GNG. Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:04, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

2014 Palestine International Championship

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable underage tournament. Murry1975 (talk) 15:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Murry1975 (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Keep: No you are wrong. This tournament are notable and have gained attention in the Arab World and Pakistan so why do you want delete it. ,, , — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uishaki (talk • contribs)

Keep: It is very notable in the Arab World and now stretching into Asia just for football purposes. But even in large Palestine communities across the world, this is big!!! Even bigger than Tournoi de France which was a friendly tournament but manages to keep it's place on Wiki due to the nations being involved...does it not?? Druryfire (talk) 19:59, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No that was a SENIOR internaional tournament, not an under-age tournament. So your comment " but manages to keep it's place on Wiki due to the nations being involved...does it not?" is wrong and very mis-representing of what gains notability. Murry1975 (talk) 21:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, so covering every friendly tournament is allowed now is it? Pakistan have a senior team at this tournament, so please don't tell me it's age related. FACT is, it's a notable tournament and is even referenced, so you can't say it's not got coverage either!! This page Tournoi de France (1988) has nothing substantial about it, but stays. Utterly pointless page that somehow sticks around Druryfire (talk) 17:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Delete - no evidence of any significant coverage as required by WP:GNG. GiantSnowman 19:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Keep: Despite being not notable for the worldwide, it is still a notable tournament in Arabic World. I can't find any reason to remove it. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 07:57, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Keep: It's easy enough to find a lot of detailed significant English-language media coverage about this tournament, and the events surrounding it. . I haven't even searched for coverage in the languages of the participating teams. Nfitz (talk) 20:34, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, on the aspect of notibilty, as there is some coverage, some on the non-free movement of players and officals, some actually mention the matches I would like clarity on some points.
 * Is it an Olympic team tournament (u23), an u22 one (as some sources put it), senior one (as others do) or is it a mixed up one (I dont see FIFA recognising it for caps/goals, but I could have missed that one)?
 * What is the name of the tournament? (I have read three different ones in the links)
 * And if this is a non-FIFA event it still may be notable, but if the sources are not good, coherent or consistent on what information they contain, then the article does not meet a reason for keeping (as notablity is not clear, or rather the lack of clarity in coverage makes the event non-notable, "routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article"). Murry1975 (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Keep per Snowball clause.--Yacatisma (talk) 04:54, 23 May 2014 (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.