Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelsea 2–3 Manchester United 2012


 * 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   Snow Delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:23, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Chelsea 2–3 Manchester United 2012

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence that the details of this particular regular-season match are notable enough for a standalone article. The alleged "controversial decisions" and "racism allegation" might be worth mentioning at the Premier League season's article, and if anything significant comes of the probe into the latter then perhaps that might be encyclopedic, but nothing shows that there is anything more than routine coverage about the details of the match itself. Kinu t/c 17:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I'm not aware of any reason why a league match should be given an article, unless there was a disaster in the game. The article name itself is also a bit odd. Lukeno94 (talk) 18:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The only thing about this game that will get any longer term coverage is the Mark Clattenburg racism controversy and that is far better covered in his article than a specific article about an otherwise unremarkable match. Keresaspa (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete "It will or might also significantly effect..." - but it hasn't yet. WP:CRYSTAL. Any match in October can affect the final positions. Up to reaching the position where certain teams cannot be caught (or cannot catch up, or lift off the bottom), any match affects the final table. The allegation against the referee is dealt with in his own article. Apart from the business of the referee, it's just a match. Some you win, some you lose. Not even a spectacular (0-14 for example) result. Peridon (talk) 19:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete It's an early season match with little known impact on the standings. The after-match items are just a distraction with nothing to do with what happened 90-94 minutes before.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:42, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep No clear reason for deletion. Proposers for deletion to make a case why this is not notable because this is a CLEARLY notable event which occured between a top two clubs of recent years in EPL and currently the 1st and 2nd ranked in this season. This match included fully controversial 2 red cards and an offside goal. It will significantly effect the table and the winners of the premier league. It also includes a direct racism allegation against a referee. So clearly it is a notable event, has history in it, will be history itself both for Football and Race. It IS a spectacular match with 2 red cards and racism issue. Race cannot be ignored in any case as per any Wikipedia rules. Also to remind you all, MU had not won a single match at Stamford Bridge for the past 10 years.49.244.115.217 (talk) 03:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "CLEARLY notable", eh? I see no evidence that this match will affect the standings other than the obvious "+1 win for team X, +1 loss for team Y" that is the effect of every match. You might think it was "spectacular" but you are not a reliable source, and stating that it "will be history" is pure speculation. -- Kinu  t/c 05:51, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Clearly not notable eh? I see clear evidence that it will affect the standing. Dont try to break WP:NPOV. Keep your points of view to yourself. Wiki doesnt work that way. There are 100s of sources that are saying the match was spectacular.49.244.115.217 (talk) 03:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * So? Can you indicate which WP guideline says that a match gets a stand-alone article on the basis of being "spectacular"....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:20, 3 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:ROUTINE. Run of the mill football match.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - no more notable than any other Premier League match, being "spectacular" (in addition to being purely a matter of opinion) is not a reason for a match having an article. Sendings off and "offside goals" happen all the time.  Racism allegation can (and probably already is, I haven't checked) be covered at Mark Clattenburg, where it belongs -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Not exactly a remarkable game, even speaking as a United fan. The only thing slightly notable in the article is the possible problems regarding Mark Clattenburg, but that would be best covered in his own article, or if it become a bigger thing in the future it may deserve a sentance or two in Racism in association football.  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  20:51, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Your vote can not be considered henceforth because your break WP:NPOV. You speak as a united fan.49.244.115.217 (talk) 03:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Rhubarb. NPOV is something totally different - you mean WP:COI. COI hardly applies when someone is calling for the deletion of an article about an away match their team WON.... Peridon (talk) 10:52, 3 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence of notability. GiantSnowman 12:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete, let it Snow - it might justify a line or two in 2012–13 Premier League if it turns out to have a particular impact on the outcome of the season (though such an "impact" would need to be verified by reliable sources). As a standalone article it is quite obviously not notable. Stalwart 111  (talk) 01:17, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NOT all I can find is routine reporting of a sports result. Mt  king  (edits)  10:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete No point in having this article. – Michael (talk) 18:55, 6 November 2012 (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.