Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlestown United


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 02:04, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Charlestown United

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Subject fails WP:N. This two and a half year old article is unreferenced, and the edit summary provided by the article's creator and almost only contributor, when he removed the prod notice, indicates that article is based on original research and the major contributor has a conflict of interest. In addition to this the article is poorly written with significant overlinking, linked years, peacock terms, flagcruft, possible copyvios etc. You name it, it's probably got it, except for citations to prove notability. It requires far too much work to bring to a reasonable standard, especially since most of the article is based on original research and lacks citations. AussieLegend (talk) 16:51, 14 March 2010 (UTC) It Also states its goals as: How is this article not helping create football history in Australia? It should not be deleted. Fixed up? Yes. Deleted? No. Juzzi0 (talk) 06:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have not been able to locate any coverage of this club in reliable sources whatsoever. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:14, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:33, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. This article is unsourced, and covers a non-notable subject. It's a clear cut deletion in my opinion. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:43, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, it should help WikiProject Football in Australia. ''"This project is dedicated to improving all aspects of Wikipedia's articles related to association football in Australia."
 * Improve and expand articles relating to the history of football in Australia.
 * Improve and expand coverage of Australia's state league competitions.
 * As far as I can see, this doesn't satisfy the requirements for deletion, and this article is an example of why wikipedia itself, is so great. It allows small community teams to have a small share of the internet limelight. It harms nobody having this page here and serves as good piece of history for the club. Everything posted on this page is fact. And can be easily found by looking through the history of the NNWS ID competition. I will go about referencing what I can now. There is no bias presented as it is presenting facts and a recount of events, rather than an opinion for or against anyone, or any object. Keep please. Juzzi0 (talk) 06:16, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and exists to cover notable topics, not to "allow small community teams to have a small share of the internet limelight". Try MySpace for that...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice, but this page isn't established so annoying 15 yr old girls can post stupid comments. We have enough of them at our games, and we also have a facebook page to keep players and fans updated with weekly matters within the club. In regard to the policy of deleting teams in England, is there a defined policy within Australia? You have said level 10 in England being a good building block, but where does that lie within Australian boundaries? This team is capable of playing in the Solo State Cup, our ground is fully enclosed and capable of charging an entry fee (however we choose not to), we have a running canteen and alcohol license, and we are capable of being promoted to the NNSW State League if we gained promotion in successive seasons. To say this club is 'too small' or not notable enough is merely your opinion, having played football in lower league England last year, I'd say this club has more notability than clubs over there, except the footballing culture in Europe gives them instant notability, whereas football in Australia apparently makes it harder for notability at lower league levels. Juzzi0 (talk) 01:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * None of this has any bearing on Wikipedia's notability requirements. If you really think the subject is notable then you need to show notability. You took great pains to vandalise the article and make personal attacks, if you can't make the same effort to show notability then the subject clearly is not as notable as you think. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: if all the creator wants is a "share of the internet limelight" then I would suggest Facebook, not an encyclopedia. No coverage in independent sources to suggest that this football club passes the general notability guidelines. -- Big  Dom  07:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Yet another non-notable amateur sports team trying to use Wikipedia as their web host. Nick-D (talk) 03:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete self promo, fails WP:N.--Jimbo W junior (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2010 (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.