Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CSL Reserve Division


 * 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   redirect to Canadian Soccer League. Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

CSL Reserve Division

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a fully professional league and so fails notability and certainly WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - being fully professional is not a criteria for leagues (only players), but there is no evidence of significant coverage necessary to have an article on the topic. C679 18:55, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 18:50, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Canadian Soccer League. No reason there shouldn't be brief mention there, given that league is notable. Nfitz (talk) 18:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Canadian Soccer League. No evidence the league is notable independently, but certainly worth a mention in the CSL article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 07:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect - No evidence of independant notability and as a reserve league, hard to see how it could achieve notability separate to its parent league. A plausible search term however. Fenix down (talk) 11:26, 25 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.