Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chester Romans


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 03:59, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Chester Romans

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable amateur American Football club. No significant coverage in reliable third party sources found. Anthem 05:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: Anthem of joy has been blocked as a sockpuppet of Claritas. Hobit (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - per fact that the AFD user in this case is a sockpuppet. Also dont see any reason for deletion.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't know anything about the user being blocked. And this article appears to be exctraordinarily well-written and looks really darn good.  Wish I could put together articles that fancy!  But the sources--please.  Twitter, Facebook, and the club website don't work here.  Find me some independent, third-party reliable sources and I'll switch my position faster than fast.  But until then, I say it needs to go.--Paul McDonald (talk) 04:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep There is quite a bit of coverage out there. A News Archive search shows quite a bit, for example: . Oddly, I'm having a very hard time pulling up most of these pages.  Some kind of network problem in the UK? Hobit (talk) 23:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - the sources provided in the Google News search do seem to meet the general notability guideline. As an aside, I never knew they supplied Katy Perry's football shirt for the MTV awards - it's amazing what you can learn during an AfD! &mdash;BETTIA&mdash; talk 15:27, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - amateur sports club with no claim to notability. Fails WP:ORG. The sources available are incidental and don't deal with the subject as a whole or in depth. TerriersFan (talk) 17:46, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- DQ  (t)   (e)  20:07, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete No sources + no specific claims of importance = no verifiability = might as well be false. i kan reed (talk) 20:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability. Sergeant Cribb (talk) 20:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete A lot of pretty pictures of an amateur American Football club, but unfortunately no good sources at all, so not notable for our purposes. Sharksaredangerous (talk) 22:37, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not sure. Out of their substantial batch of GNews hits, four appear to discuss the club in detail:   and . The trouble with these is that they're all local newspapers. Perfectly good for verifying information, and they do go some way to establishing notability, but WP:ORG suggests that a regional or national level source is required to make an organisation notable. An argument could possibly be made that icLiverpool is regional since it covers at least one-and-a-half counties, but it's not entirely convincing. On the fence for now. Alzarian16 (talk) 06:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I've trimmed the article, removing any extraneous details and weasel words. However, it's now barely a stub - while some notability is apparent, I can't say it justifies the existence of an article. I'm not going to close this particular AFD, as I'd like to see if anybody can build off of my trimming and rearrangement. m.o.p  01:02, 4 July 2011 (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.