Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016–17 KNVB Cup


 * 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 Userfy. There seems to be ample consensus that it is too soon for this article, but I will userfy to User:BasFey/2016–17 KNVB Cup so that this can continue to be worked on and moved back to mainspace once the tournament is upon us. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

2016–17 KNVB Cup

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON. No sourced information for this to be created yet. Qed237&#160;(talk) 13:30, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Qed237&#160;(talk)</i> 13:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - too early. GiantSnowman 21:55, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Objection, keep article I have created the article, and put a lot of time and energy in it. The user above claims that the article is made too early, while there is already relevant news of it. Also, the articles about the domestic cups of Germany and Israel next season are also made already. The first user claims that the article did not had any sourced information. I have added relevant and reliable sources (articles from the association itself) to the article, making it an article meeting the quality requirements. I hereby dismiss both claims. BasFey (talk) 20:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:OSE? Just because other articles exists does not mean they should or they could have other notable information. You can not use those as motiation here. <i style="font-family:Sans-serif"><b style="color:blue">Qed</b><b style="color:red">237</b>&#160;<b style="color:green">(talk)</b></i> 22:56, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Then again, there is already relevant news about the event, namely the expansion of the tournament. That news was announced about two months ago. And when this article is deleted, the two aforementioned articles about the domestic cups of Germany and Israel should be deleted as well. BasFey (talk) 16:48, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment After my last defensive argument on keeping this article, I've added things to comply with the quality of this article, like categories, templates and expansion of the table. I believe I almost did everything now to save this article for deletion. When I think up of improvements or see news, I will apply it immediatley, if still possible. BasFey (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If article will be deleted now, after 4 months it can be re-created or restored. 4 months... Not sure if really is a WP:TOOSOON case. --XXN, 20:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:12, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * All the District Cups, except the North (Round of 16) and West II (Final) now have the quarter-finals as their next round. It wouldn't be long until all semi-finalists are known. BasFey (talk) 13:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Userfy - seems to be a textbook case for userfy, editors shouldn't be discouraged by deletion of such articles, which will surely benefit from the information in the not-too-distant future. C<span style="color: #6A5ACD; text-decoration: inherit; -moz-text-decoration-color: #6A5ACD; text-decoration-color: #6A5ACD;">679 18:21, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Userfy - It is obvious that the competition will take place, but not enough details are yet known to give this article enough encyclopedic value for me to !vote keep. It's obvious that the article will be recreated, so I find no need to delete and require the author to request undeletion. — Jkudlick • t • c • s 20:49, 7 March 2016 (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.