Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AFC Walton


 * 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. Black Kite 21:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

AFC Walton

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Amateur football team representing a tiny village and playing in a division which is only at the theoretical 17th level of the English football league system. No sources found, not notable -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

---

Hi,

Sorry if ive made any infringments by starting this article, i was only looking to expand and put some infor up on all teams in the Yeovil and District League.

There are no sources yet as i only started putting info up this morning!!

Is there anything in particular ive done wrong??

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by KarlStephens (talk • contribs) 10:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not that you've done anything wrong, but essentially your team does not meet the requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. We have what is termed a notability guideline, which means that each subject must be deemed "notable" by virtue of having been the subject of in-depth coverage in multiple independent, reliable, third-party sources, such as newspapers, magazines, websites maintained by organisations with paid staff and a proven fact-checking policy (ie not just somebody's personal homepage), etc.  If you can provide evidence that your team has received such coverage and therefore meets the guidelines, I'll happily withdraw the AfD, but given the level of football we're talking about I think it's unlikely that any team in the league has received that sort of coverage.  I'd have no objection to being proved wrong though :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 13:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep If Wikipedia has the space for entries on every tiny hamlet and back road in the USA, it has space for entries like this. However if it stays as it is, with the only named person the sole editor, then it will look like self-promotion and should go. Markb (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds a bit like WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS to me.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:25, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability. The club has never played in the FA Cup, FA Trophy or FA Vase, nor in any division in the top 10 levels of English football. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  13:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

---
 * Delete - Teams in the (apparently) 17th level of the English football league probably aren't even notable in the area where they are from. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) | (talk to me) | (What I've done)  14:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Would be interesting to eventually expand to the leagues below what we already cover, however this is just too low to be considered notable. Uksam88 (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

If its really that much of an issue to everyone then jsut delete it! It really does not bother me that much, as i said i was only looking to expand the "stub" about the Yeovil and District league that i play in, below it states "you can help by adding to this stub".

If you are unwilling to let pages like this stay up then please remove that line! Dont ask people to contribute then kick up a fuss!

Thanks

-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by KarlStephens (talk • contribs) 15:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment, This nomination was made in the middle of an article under construction. It is very discouraging to editors to have their articles nominated for AFD when there is a under construction template on the article and the article is actively being worked on. Looking at the article history...https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=AFC_Walton&action=history you can see the AFD was inserted while the article was under development.Smallman12q (talk) 15:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It was my view that, even when fully developed, an article on a team that only produces one Google hit had no realistic chance of ever meeting the requirements for inclusion. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment, Google doesn't index everything. There are a number of other reliable sources including books, magazines, private publications/speeches and various other sites that Google doesn't (or hasn't yet) indexed. Such an approach for finding articles suitable for AFD is flawed. See WP:GOOGLETEST for more information.Smallman12q (talk) 20:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As I have repeatedly stated, I will happily withdraw the nomination if appropriate sourcing can be unearthed, but frankly I'd be astounded if a three-year-old amateur team playing on a community centre pitch in a village league at the 17th level of English football has received any coverage whatsoever. If anyone's published a book about the team, I'll eat my settee -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, I did a google search and this is what I came up with http://www.southportvisiter.co.uk/southport-sport/southport-district-football/2008/11/21/southport-amateurs-gain-victory-over-walton-in-the-william-shakespeare-memorial-trophy-101022-22306796/, Blog ,anticipated stats, AFC. It's not much...but its a start.Smallman12q (talk) 22:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The first link refers to a different AFC Walton who play in the Preston and District League, over 200 miles away from where the team under discussion plays. The second link is the official website (so not an independent source) of a team called "AFC Walton Wanderers" (so not even the same team) and has no content anyway.  The third link has no content about any team called AFC Walton at all. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well...I tried...^.^ Smallman12q (talk) 20:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

""This article about an English football competition is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.""

Above is the line of text found on the Yeovil and District Football League page, i believe i was doing exactly as the line suggests in expanding the stub.

KarlStephens (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * For info, that notice is intended to encourage people to expand the article it is displayed on rather than to start all-new break-out articles. Maybe the article could be expanded to include some history of the league, past champions, etc?  Bristol Downs Football League is a good example of an article on a "low-level" league that's been expanded well -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

That was the sort of thing i was looking to do, i decided that it would be best if i created the AFC Walton page as more of a tester page for myself so that i could get used to writing articles. I was quite looking forward to doing a bigger article on the league, that was until the Walton article was flagged for deletion about 10 minutes after i started it and whilst it still had the "under construction" tag.

KarlStephens (talk) 15:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I formally apologise to anyone I have offended by tagging the article while it was marked as under construction. As stated above, I will happily withdraw if suitable sources can be found -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom as non-notable. There also seems to be a conflict of interests here. – PeeJay 09:23, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. 17th level league. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 16:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Im amazed at how many people are getting so worked up about a tiny article, as i said before if its that much of issue just delete it, i dont think anyone would be too bothered.

I thought Wikipedia was meant to be more about making information readily available to the general public, the info i was putting up was not offensive to anyone, it was purely factual and was not, in my opinion, any real cause for concern.

As i said i am surprise that so many people seem to be determined to delete this article, even though my long term goal was to put info up on the entire league. Bristol Downs Football League has been referrd to as a good example and yet that lies at an even lower level than my league!

I personally, having had to go through all this, simply can not be bothered to contribute to Wikipedia, it just doesnt seem worth the hassle.

I cant imagine how everyone reacts when someone actually puts offensive material up!

enjoy your debate! —Preceding unsigned comment added by KarlStephens (talk • contribs) 17:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability has recently become a bigger concern as more people try to post content...unfortunately, it does mean that a number of otherwise acceptable articles will no longer meet wikipedia's standards.Smallman12q (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. It is well-settled that teams this low in the English league system aren't notable. Stifle (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No reliable sources prove notability.--Sloane (talk) 02:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination Skitzo (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2009 (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.