Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burlington SC


 * 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. slakr \ talk / 03:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Burlington SC

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Essentially empty article about a team in a non-professional league. Does not meet Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability or WP:N. Possibly a case of WP:TOOSOON. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete sure, why not BlueSalix (talk) 16:09, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - a team in the top-level of Canadian soccer, seems notable. GiantSnowman 19:09, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment The league is no longer sanctioned by the FIFA-recognized body and to call it the top-level in Canada is a misnomer as it's 1) not a professional league and 2) it's the third division, behind MLS and NASL, both of which have teams in Canada. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - the league's future is indeed in doubt, and it may not be sanctioned in 2014. However it was sanctioned in 2013, which this team played in.  The league is semi-professional (very semi to be fair), and is the top level of non-fully professional soccer in Canada. I can't think of a single other country where we'd not consider teams in the top level of non-fully professional as notable.  In the UK we consider the top 8-levels of non-fully professional soccer notable. I don't think we're anywhere near the line here.  These are real teams, with real players, in stadiums with paid attendance. Nfitz (talk) 03:05, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per GS and Nfitz. WP:FOOTYN consensus is that teams in top flight national competition are notable, they do not have to be fully professional. Article needs improving not deleting. Fenix down (talk) 14:44, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment THE LEAGUE IS NOT THE TOP FLIGHT! It never has been and it never will. It's like the fifth division in England. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:39, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * So? Teams in the fifth division (Conference National) in England are notable.  I believe teams in the 10th division in England (so to speak) are notable. Nfitz (talk) 03:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm inclined to agree with Walter Görlitz on this. WP:FOOTYN presumes a European league structure, which does not exist in Canada. While the CSL was the closest thing to a top league organized by the Canadian Soccer Association, calling it a national league is complete misnomer, given how regionally concentrated the league is. (All the clubs are within at most 400km of each other, in country that spans about 6500km.) More importantly, the club fails WP:GNG pretty comprehensively. I lived in southern Ontario, where the league is based, for the better part of ten years, but only found out that it even existed through editing Wikipedia, that's how little coverage it receives. This club does not appear to be an exception. Sir Sputnik (talk) 07:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Based on Sir Sputnik's !vote and the fact that if fails WP:GNG considerably. JMHamo (talk) 15:09, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Matches are reported on in newspapers. Meet WP:GNG -  .  Some games get TV coverage - .  It's not fully professionaly, put it's semi-pro, and as such gets media coverage. I think your mistaking this for a pub league. Nfitz (talk) 21:36, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Have you read what you've linked here? It definitely doesn't meet GNG's requirement of "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail This is just routine coverage (coverage used loosely) in the local press. JMHamo (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Two issues with the "TV coverage". The coverage is a local cable channel. That's all. And the copy on the page is out-dated. It indicates "The current CSL champions are Toronto Croatia" when 1) the league is so disorganized that the current champion hasn't been added to http://www.canadiansoccerleague.com/pastchampions.htm 2) the champion is SC Waterloo. This clearly shows how important the CSL is to this local-access station. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Local cable station? It's carried on the Rogers cable throughout Ontario.  They have millions of subscribers.  It's a huge penetration.  The league is in a state of disorganization and collapse - there's no question about that.  That's not the issue though. Given the amount of media attention the collapse and desanctioning the league has had, I'd think that itself implies notability!
 * Yes, local cable. It's not on SportsNet. It's not on TSN. It's a local cable channel. Even TVO gets better ratings. But again, it is only Ontario and not Manitoba west or Quebec east. Not national syndication. It's a local cable station. The number of subscribers to the cable service is not the issue, it's the number of viewers. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Good grief ... far better penetration than some of the national Sportnet channels I get on cable - such as Sportsnet World 9 ... and probably more viewers too! Still, that's not the point. I'm simply pointing out that it's not just a small-town cable sytem, but a cablesystem (cablesystems actually as Cogeco simulcast the Rogers broadcast) with more customers than many countries have people ... such as Ireland. TV broadcasts aside, the team meets GNG on print coverage. Nfitz (talk) 05:23, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Exactly. It is a small-town cable system since each location decides whether to air a game or run its emergency city council meeting. Ultimately, without ratings numbers this broadcast is not notable and the attention it gets from its "network" is clearly lacking since the previous season's winner has not been updated two months on.
 * And besides, no one is arguing that the league is not notable, we're discussing the team here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ged  UK  13:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete No 3rd party sources to prove notability.--Jeffrd10 (talk) 13:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lacks the significant coverage to establish notability. The coverage available are match reports in local community papers, and the television coverage is through cable access channels. -- Whpq (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Same reasons as Fenix_down . Very disappointed to see that articles like this are being put forward for deletion especially as all the other teams in 2013 Canadian Soccer League season are included.  We are simply too officious and inflexible with very little thought or respect for the original editors.  The end result will be that further Wiki Editors will jump ship - http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520446/the-decline-of-wikipedia/ League Octopus 19:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, the worthiness or otherwise of the league is irrelevant if the team doesn't meet WP:GNG, which this one doesn't. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC).
 * WP football/soccer coverage in Canada is fundamentally flawed because there is not a national cup competition (normally used as a key criteria WP:FOOTYN). It is utter nonsense that a third tier CSL club is being deleted when every effort should be made to improve the article.  For those who might wish to follow this option at a later date I refer you to http://www.rocketrobinsoccerintoronto.com/reports13/13csl000.htm as a starting point. League Octopus 14:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * What's utter nonsense is that you continue to call this a third-tier club. I will remind you that the league is not sanctioned so it's not on any tier. Even last year, the league could not be compared with a third-tier team in any other nation. The league's champion would lose to a fifth-tier team in England, Spain, Germany, Italy or France. Again, it's not about the league but the team. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * From afar Canadian soccer only has:
 * Tier 1 MSL - Montreal Impact, Toronto FC, Vancouver Whitecaps FC
 * Tier 2 NASL - FC Edmonton, Ottawa Fury
 * Just 5 teams!!! Why take out teams at the next level down - which appears from a normal perspective to be the main tier in reality (and yes there are admin probs at the moment)?  It would have been so easy to have improved the Burlington SC article bringing it up the standard of other CSL club articles.  For me this deletion exposes the deficiencies of Wikipedia. League Octopus 09:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes. Only five fully professional teams. The "next level down" is no longer this league as the CSL is not sanctioned. Yes, let's add every amateur team in Canada. That's a great idea. The other CSL club articles are of poor standards and this article already meets their standard. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The way the issue is being addressed we will be left with 5 soccer club articles in Wikipedia for Canada! I prepared an essay WP:NCLUB a couple of years ago to try and overcome the dreadful inconsistencies in Wikipedia's soccer coverage across the globe.  The issue whether CSL is sanctioned or not at the moment is a red herring.  CSL was I believe affiliated to CSA in 2013 and they will soon be firmly "put back into line" by CSA/FIFA (with reference to a similar situation in Uganda last season). This issue of CSL deletions ought to be properly addressed by WT:FOOTY. League Octopus 15:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Footy didn't write WP:GNG and NCLUB is written with the European club systems in mind. The only question we must ask is if the team is notable, not if the league is.
 * Third division teams in Europe are professional in larger football nations and semi-professional in smaller nations. In Canada, they're entirely amateur. Young players who can't or have no desire to break into a professional league play there and professionals who are retiring play there. Again this isn't about the league but this one team. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * We will always disagree on this issue - refer
 * Canadian Soccer League League Octopus 20:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * And I'll remind you that you're not on the ground here and are not really certain what the league is like. Just because you can wager on matches doesn't make it a notable league. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * AfD discussions of this nature will always reflect whether a contributor has a genuine interest and passion for semi-professional soccer or whether the issue is looked at purely in terms of WP:GNG. With video and photo coverage and stats one can certainly can a "strong feel" for what facilities are like on the ground. The bottom line is that there is a pitiful number of Wikipedia articles covering soccer clubs in Canada - Category:Soccer clubs in Canada by province or territory - many of which fail WP:GNG.  The removal of the Burlington SC article adds another tier for deletion.  It is so depressing.  League Octopus 10:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * This league is not even semi-professional. The reason that there is a pitiful number of Wikipedia articles covering soccer clubs in Canada is because it's not a notable sport here. If you want a strong feel for what it's like, reach up into the air and close your hands. If there's anything there, then try again. If there's nothing there: that's what you have for soccer in Canada. I say that as a fan of the sport and a Canadian. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Our difference Walter is that when I reach up into the air I find "stardust". What is not notable to a Canadian can be very special to soccer enthusiasts living elsewhere in the world. This discussion has helped me to understand and appreciate the differing viewpoints. League Octopus 09:38, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You have long arms if you can reach stars when you reach up. You probably also need a roof. Soccer notability has been defined and there are no professional players in this unsanctioned third division league. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:37, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Calling this league "top flight" is badly misleading, and there is no evidence of meeting GNG here. As Walter said, this may simply be too soon. If the league and the club take off, it might be worth revisiting the issue. --BDD (talk) 18:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, let me offer a modification of WP:HAMMER: "If the name and squad list of a future soccer team are not yet known, the team is very likely to have its page deleted from Wikipedia." --BDD (talk) 18:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * What's the relevance of that? It's not a future team, they played last season. Nfitz (talk) 05:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * My mistake. The article is apparently quite out of date, unless this club found a way to play without a squad (which would admittedly be extraordinary, probably worth an article). --BDD (talk) 05:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * According to http://canadiansoccerleague.com/teams/burlington.asp they did have a squad but their official site is erroring and the league doesn't list one either. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of their squad can be identified from these two links - http://www.rocketrobinsoccerintoronto.com/reports13/13csl025.htm and http://www.rocketrobinsoccerintoronto.com/reports13/13csl057.htm. I note that the first game had an attendance of about 250 and was broadcast live on Rogers Community channel for those who lived in Brampton and local area. League Octopus 10:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * So what you're saying is their official CSA article doesn't match their current roster? And what was the viewership on the local access channel? No ratings because it's not a real network. It's mandated that they show community events. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I note that there are a number Rogers TV stations covering the Ontario area. By way of comparison my local club in England - Long Melford F.C. (English tenth tier) - has average attendances of 57 and does not ever receive any TV coverage (including news extracts).  The squad is not listed on the league website but is included on the club website.  In my view imposing excessive restrictions on WP soccer coverage for Canada compared with other countries is distorting WP's world-wide club coverage. It seems absurd that WP can cover the league clubs in say  Aruba but not in the CSL in Canada. League Octopus 17:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * There are multiple Rogers stations because it's mandated that each city has its own.
 * Once again, this isn't about the CSL in Canada, which is an unsanctioned league, it's about the club, which clearly lacks notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:45, 12 February 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.