Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019–20 Eredivisie


 * 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 Draftify. Obviously we will have an article but not this one. Spartaz Humbug! 07:27, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

2019–20 Eredivisie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Besides the names of the 2 teams (PSV and Ajax) and their stadiums/capacity, everything on this page is incorrect or speculation. Wiki is not a speculation encyclopedia, nor an announcement board of what might be. Sb008 (talk) 12:57, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Season doesn't start at 9 August, the Eerste divisie will.
 * (Regular) season will not end 24 May with play-offs taking place after
 * The assignment of spots in European leagues will most likely differ.
 * The reference to the season rules is invalid. A new document will be published with the rules for 2019/20.
 * Coaches and captains of teams are far from certain. In case of Ajax the odds them changing is substantial.
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2019 April 6.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 13:02, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:04, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:05, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:05, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: Deletion is not cleanup. The erroneous information can be removed, having erroneous information is not a reason to delete. This article can exist as a stub with the qualified teams and certain information like their stadiums: there are already two qualified teams so there's at least some certain information. By June, all of the qualified teams will be known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.239.57 (talk) 13:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - It's too soon to create this article. – PeeJay 14:01, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Draft or Keep Pointless deleting something that's needed to recreate it in a months time. Govvy (talk) 14:34, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Articles can be restored by admins at such time as is warranted. No point keeping something in draft space when we can just delete it, and it definitely shouldn't be kept. – PeeJay 17:24, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Those teams have qualified for next year's season, so it's ok to have it created. Kante4 (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a general thumbrule that next-season (next-iteration pattern) articles can be created when the year they start in is the current year, or when the previous iteration is over. Please cite the policy which states that it's too soon to create this article.
 * Created after last Indian general elections
 * Created this year as the end of the EPL season approaches
 * Per WP:FUTURE, this article satisifies the conditions that this will definitely happen. The article can be modified to remove the speculation bits. -- QEDK ( 後  ☕  桜 ) 18:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * If you expect PeeJay2K3 to cite a policy, it's only fair you do the same for your thumbrule. Furthermore, I don't understand the 2 examples you provide, the 2019 Indian general election page was created 5 years (2014) before the actual election. In 2014 no one could guarantee the government elected would not collapse. So the page was pure speculation at creation time. And I most certainly hope you don'y wish to compare the 2019–20 Premier League and the 2019–20 Eredivisie (DED) page. On the EPL page I don't see speculations about managers/coaches, team captains, kit manufacturers and shirt sponsors. I don't see invalid start and end dates. I don't see invalid references to season rules. I don't see a ranking table with incorrect European League qualification options and 18 TBA listings. If you can guarantee the stadium names mentioned will not change, the EPL page contains only accurate info where the DED page besides 2 team names only contains invalid info or speculation. The DED page has been used as an exercise page and is a disgrace as is. --Sb008 (talk) 20:34, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Let me quote part of the second pillar: "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons." At the time the article was created, the only verifiable accurate information available were start and end date of the season (both listed incorrect) and not 2 but 5 teams which will participate next season. If you study the current ranking and matches to go, in depth, the list of 5 teams can be expanded even more. From those teams, in general, the only thing which can be listed is the town they from. For the 2 teams listed right now, we can assume the stadium names still to be correct next season. However nothing is for sure. There was a time you were called insane if you said PSV will have a different shirt sponsor than Philips. So who knows, maybe next season the PSV stadium is called Sony Stadium. All in all, in general the stadium name, kit manufacturer and shirt sponsor are in some cases likely but in none factual. The shirt sponsor now listed for PSV in the next season is incorrect. To list coaches and team captains is even more absurd. The transfer circus still has to start, so almost all is open. Like mentioned before, the spots available in European leagues are not yet clear. But the way it's listed now for sure will not apply. This alone makes it bizarre to create a standings table already. The majority of the teams not yet known makes it even more bizarre. However, what can be said for sure is that PSV will not be among the first 9 at the start of the season. To list them right now as 2nd is incorrect for sure. Ajax could in theory start as 1st, but it's not what I expect. If the page should be kept, right now all that can remain are a corrected start and end date and a list of teams (name and town only) which for sure will participate in next season. All the rest is assumption and speculation and doesn't belong on the page (yet). --Sb008 (talk) 18:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - CRYSTAL does not apply here. GiantSnowman 07:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 *  Delete Draftify per WP:TOOSOON, there isn't sufficient information yet for an article although it will need to be created at some point. SSSB (talk) 16:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep If this does get delete, it's properly going to be recreated anyway in a couple of months with this type of seasonal article. Matt294069 (talk) 05:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * keep If delete, it will be recreated in a few weeks Hhkohh (talk) 08:01, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ,, that's not a keep argument, it's a drafting argument, moving it to draft allows an article that was created prematurely to be republished at an appropriate time. This article was created prematurely and should be temporary moved to draftspace where it can be added to and improved until an appropriate time to move it back to the mainspace. SSSB (talk) 08:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I am fine with drafting. Either is okay to me Hhkohh (talk) 10:40, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Drafting would just mean that another user could create a stab in the article space, and then we have both a stub and a draft.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:47, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , unlikly, when you attempt to recreate a deleted article a notice comes up informing the editor that the article was deleted, and when you create an article that exists in the draft space the same thing happens. Besides another user creating, also prematurly, is not an argument to keep the article. SSSB (talk) 10:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Being a new page patroller, I have seen this actually happening so many times that I can not really believe this is unlikely. Now, if you need the argument, deletion and draftifying are the last means of dealing with the article which can not be otherwiose salvaged. This article can be reduced to an entirely uncontroversial stub in a couple of minutes, it is just the nominator was not willing to do so and nominated it for AfD out of principle (they and I had a discussion prior to the nomination).--Ymblanter (talk) 11:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * reducing it to a stub doesn't make it uncontreversial, it has been nominated per WP:TOOSOON making it a stub doesn't change anything. SSSB (talk) 11:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not in any way uncontroversial. The 2019–20 Eredivisie is going to happen with absolute certainty, and we have plenty of reliable sources about it. We also know quite a few facts with absolute certainty, for example, how many clubs are going to participate and what are the positions of these clubs in the current season going to be. Or who is going to organize the competition.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * but we don't need an article about it yet because there isn't enough specific information to warrant an article per WP:TOOSOON. There is no need for this article to exist yet. SSSB (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Our policies do not operate with such notions like "we need an article" or "we do not need an article". You think we do not need it, I think we need it, who cares. The policies establish notability (which in this case nobody really disputes) and whether the article otherwise conforms to the policies (it does not since it contains clearly false statements). Then the question is what do we do with the article: clean up, draftify, or delete. The policies are pretty clear that cleaning up is preferable. Additionally, it is unclear who is going to work on this article if it goes to draft and who will remember to move it to the article space once more info is available. My guess is that nobody is going to do it, but just someone recreates something directly in the article space.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Look if you really want to complain about the fact this article is indeed WP:TOOSOON then why haven't you gone and AFD 2019–20 La Liga and 2019–20 Bundesliga as they haven't happened yet. Both of those events will happen in the near future and yet you haven't targeted those. Maybe it is because there is no references in the article and that is why you have put it up for deletion. Matt294069 (talk) 00:06, 12 April 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.