Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Addlestone United F.C


 * 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. The club has not achieved notability per WP:NFOOTY or WP:GNG. Accordingly, the subject is not worthy of an article until/unless (1) it is promoted (significantly) higher up the football ladder, (2) it has some other football achievement to make it a notable club, or (3) it does something to cause it to garner enough significant, substantial coverage to make it notable. Accordingly, I am striking it from article mainspace. However, I am moving the content to the original editor's user space at User:Stu9891/Addlestone United FC to allow him to continue to develop the article or to salvage some of the content to other articles as mentioned in the discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 14:59, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Addlestone United F.C

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Disputed PROD, original reason was "Club has never played above the notional level 16 of the English football league system, six levels below that deemed notable by WP:FOOTY" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:47, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Update - since I opened the AfD, the article's creator has posted on my talk page "Hi Chris. I have not finished the article on Addlestone F.C, but the club was formed because the original Addlestone and Weybridge F.C, who have played at a high level on the football pyramid, folded. I would like to ask you that you respect the decision to allow me to create this article because of the town's need for another local football team." -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:48, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep it - I have a soft spot for newer editors and I think the article should be kept and allowed to be expanded upon, not only is the article not hurting anything, but deleting it would discourage a new editor from further contributing. I approved this page when It was first created because I believe it has potential and other clubs at the same level have their own pages.  ~ Euphoria 42  07:54, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Please give examples of other clubs who have never played higher than this level who have articles, because I'd be surprised if there are any........... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please see WP:ILIKEIT, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:NOHARM for guidance on why these arguments are no appropriate for AfD. Other articles may exist on clubs at the same level, but these will be because that club has either played at a higher level historically or have competed in a national competition such as the FA Cup, per the notability consensus at WP:FOOTYN. Fenix down (talk) 08:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep it - Please let me keep this page. There are a few clubs who have not played at the level you're stating but I need to start somewhere. It is relevant and local people have asked me to create the page, due to Addlestone F.C folding! I am doing it for good reasons. I reformed the local club as I want to create a link for the community. I already have a ground share with a club from the Combined Counties League. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stu9891 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment - Please see WP:NOTHOSTING for reasons why creating a link for a local community is not an appropriate argument to keep an article. Fenix down (talk) 08:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Club has not played in a national competition per WP:FOOTYN, no indication of significant, reliable coverage of a non-routine basis to satisfy GNG. The club play at level fourteen on the pyramid. Fenix down (talk) 08:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 *  Keep it  - has just said that the club play at level 14. In any case, no matter what level the club is currently at, the club was formed as Addlestone FC folded. It is a 'phoenix' club and as such can surely link to that club's past playing experience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stu9891 (talk • contribs)
 * Please don't !vote more than once. The long-established cut-off point for notability is level 10, the level at which teams are eligible to enter the FA Cup, so 14 would still be far too low.  However, double-checking our article on the Guildford and Woking Alliance League reveals that the top division is level 14, so this club actually plays at level 17 -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please see WP:NOTINHERITED for reasons as to why being a phoenix club would not automatically confer notability. Fenix down (talk) 08:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Plus this club wasn't actually formed until 29 years after AWTFC folded. By no sane definition can it be regarded as a "phoenix" club, it's simply a new club started in the same town where another club played decades earlier...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * COMMENT - I was given the choice by the secretary Bob Dick, who is also Secretary of the Surrey F.A, that I could play in Division 1 or 2. I wanted one more season in Division 3 for experience, but we are well within our rights to play higher!!!! That would put us in level 15 or 16. We could've even put ourselves in the premiership which is level 14. Could you please afford us the courtesy to remain a page and gain the level you are stating? The constitution for this season can still even be changed, but we are intent on playing in Division 3 for one more season. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stu9891 (talk • contribs)
 * Please sign your comments by typing ~ at the end..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - playing in level 17 or level 14 is irrelevant, wht the club needs to have done is either played in a national competition, such as the FA Cup per WP:FOOTYN or garnered significant, reliable, non-routine coverage to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 08:35, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * COMMENT - That is not even the reason why the page was requested to be deleted!! There are many, many clubs on Wikipedia who have not played a national cup whatsoever. Especially the FA Cup. I feel this is getting silly now. I have explained why the page should stay and I feel we are drifting from the original dispute. I would like to do more work on this article, so can I please have this case closed? We have played in the Surrey County Cup last season. Information that I want to put on the page!
 * Comment - Where are these clubs? We are not drifting from the original dispute, this element of the deletion rationale: six levels below that deemed notable by WP:FOOTY is what we are discussing. If the club has not played at this level or not participated in a national cup competition then they need to show significant, reliable, non-routine coverage to satisfy GNG. I kind of feel like I am repeating myself here. Fenix down (talk) 08:51, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I would really like to continue with this and I can assure ChrisTheDude that we will easily play at the level he stated. As mentioned, I could've done so this season. Stu9891
 * Please read WP:CRYSTAL. You have no way of guaranteeing that your club will "easily" reach level 10 (which in your part of the country would be the Combined Counties League Division One), and even if you could, it would take at an absolute minimum until 2021 to get promoted to that level.  We do not keep articles for six or more years on the assumption that the subject will become notable after that time...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:54, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Tongham FC - Here is just one club I am talking about. I can't be expected to search the whole database, but many more exist. They have NOT played in the FA Cup. Also, We can jump divisions. Depending on the players we have. We have the ground facilities to do so. As I have already said, I was allowed to move higher should I so wish. We already have the capabilities to play Combined Counties Football. We ground share with Hanworth Villa. It's level 9. I just wanted to ensure the short term goals of the club, hence why I have not rushed into playing higher. Having this page is relevant and can help it grow and become successful. Stu9891
 * Comment - they've played at level 10 before, though again, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Please also stop using arguments that go against WP:CRYSTAL. When / if the club ever get to that level then they will be considered notable. Until then, you need to show significant, reliable, non-routine coverage to satisfy GNG. Fenix down (talk) 09:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 17:41, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep it - My vote wasn't counted. I am trying to update the article with content but people are deleting the notable points I am making. Also, Farnborough North End FC have a page. They're in the same situation as us. I would like a resolution to this please ASAP, as I am keen to build the page up. I don't want to spend hours on it for no reason. Please may I keep the page? Stu9891 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment - I'm not really sure what part of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS you're not understanding, although if you read the article more closely you will see they have played in the Combined Counties League division 1 which is level 10 as well as having competed in the FA Vase. As you have been repeatedly told, this club is well below the automatic notability threshold regarding the football pyramid. As such, you need to show the club have garnered significant, reliable, non-routine coverage to satisfy GNG. To support your keep vote, can you please indicate where these sources are. By the way AfDs normally continue for at least a week, but often longer if debate continues, they are only closed early if there is an overwhelmingly unanimous decision to keep or delete. Fenix down (talk) 13:08, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please may you give me some examples then of what I should do/produce in order to satisfy GNG? What would be a good thing you'd look for?Stu9891 (talk • contribs)
 * Well, there is no set thing, but I would look for articles in newspapers of significant length outlining the history of the club, it's impact on the community, successes, failures and the like. I would be careful of using local news sources, as these are not normally acceptable given their limited readership, though this does not mean you need to show coverage in national media. Additionally, match / transfer reporting and various team lists / results sites are not deemed appropriate as these are considered routine coverage and alsmot never go into a great deal of depth. Fenix down (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Also Stu9891, can you please not remove the AfD template from the article, as you did earlier today. The template quite clearly states on it that it must not be removed, and doing so is considered vandalism and could well get you blocked from editing -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:42, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Comment - Could I use this article information with another page? Addlestone for example? Could I build info within the page that way? Could I use the article under a different category? Are there any other wiki-type set ups on the internet that could use this article? Stu9891 (talk
 * Comment - Yeah, no problem. I would just like an end to this. Either way. I just want to create the page. I can't believe people have such a problem, but there you go!! Would sponsors mentioning us on Twitter class as media coverage? I am still a little unsure of how I can satisfy GNG. We haven't been in a newspaper yet. I just would like to know how else I could make it work. As I have said though, I just want to make a very good article and for that I need time. Deleting it isn't going to help. Stu9891 (talk • contribs)
 * See WP:GNG for what is needed, especially the bit about significant coverage. Passing mentions on Twitter definitely don't meet the requirements, I'm afraid.  We appreciate that you want to make a good article about your club, but unfortunately WP has entry requirements.  Just because a good article could be written about something doesn't necessarily get it a free pass into the encyclopedia........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - you could do as long as it is properly sourced and relevant. Addlestone I would say is not an appropriate place for much information from this article given the low level that the club currently play at, perhaps a sentence. Addlestone & Weybridge Town F.C. would be more approprite. However, given the fact that there is more than a quarter of a century between the original club folding and this one starting, it is not really correct to describe the new club as in anyway directly linked as a phoenix club, other than by geography. I note there is already a brief comment on the club's existence. Unless other sources can be found explicitly noting a link between the two clubs, I would say this would suffice. I don't know whether they have any specific inclusion criteria, but I would suggest the football wiki on Wikia, as a first port of call. Fenix down (talk) 17:19, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Comment - As it is plain to see there are a lot of people who just want to make life difficult, why don't you just delete it then?? I can't work on the article until I know that it's being kept, so it's catch 22.
 * Delete - per nom. There is not indication that the clubs has received sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG and nor has the club played in a national cup competition, meaning it fails WP:FOOTYN as well. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I would just like a resolution. Is that too much to ask? Delete it or keep it. Stu9891 (talk — Preceding undated comment added 11:36, 30 July 2015 (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.