Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deportivo football club


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-11 00:47Z 

Deportivo football club

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Procedural nomination as I noticed the Prod template had been removed without comment by the article's original creator. No !vote from myself at this time, I need to look into it..... ChrisTheDude 08:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. ChrisTheDude 08:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Quick rundown:
 * The first result on Google for "northcote" "deportivo" is a forum thread (!), the first message of which says the following: Official: Deportivo (northcote indoor soccer leage (sic) ) FC

Insportz Northcote on friday nights

me and a few mates.

in first season last year - second half of year - season 2 for 2006 we won the premiership in our first year as a bunch of 15 y.o playing 14-many 18 y.o.'s
 * which to me suggests that this club is clearly non-notable as per a million other AFDs on amateur indoor "hobbyist" teams. Note also zero Ghits for "northcote league" and "northcote super league".  Therefore I now !vote Delete.  I'm also nominating the club's "stadium", the rather unconvincingly named Estadio Northchetti (which again produces no results on Google) and !vote to delete on that one too..... ChrisTheDude 08:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I also find as a rule of thumb that any article in which the creator has felt the need to put "this subject is notable because....." generally isn't.... ChrisTheDude 09:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In support of the above: the author of the wiki article and poster in the forum thread referenced above (under the handle: dem12345) was subsequently banned from that forum. Responses to his post criticize him for posting a thread in that forum about a non-notable team. Source: http://www.melbournevictory.net/forum/showthread.php?t=27539 This confirms proposal to delete. Gregorytopov 17:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Seem a hoax. The logo look like Real Sociedad one, and fusion with Deportivo La Coruña. Matthew_hk   t  c  09:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - smells like a hoax or a very minor team talking themselves up. - fchd 09:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the team as (at best) a very minor-league team. They aren't in the A-League, which is the top league in these parts, and what little indication there is of the level at which they do play suggests that it's a local-league affair. As full disclosure, I previously Speedied the team and was questioned over it, which may explain the claims that the team is "very notable" in this version of the article. I see no particular reason why the stadium should be kept, although there may be something more significant which goes on there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Guys, please let this stay. I've added a real valuable source at the end of ext.source section. This is a real team and league, forget the bit about "bunch of mates" that was when we were wiki virgins. Please allow it, really means a lot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dozzaddemar (talk • contribs) 10:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC).
 * I can understand that you're keen to have this page on here, but WP has a whole bunch of policies which articles need to satisfy, the main ones being Verifiability and Notability, neither of which your team seems to meet (or be able to meet). I'm sure you understand that these policies are there for a reason i.e. if we didn't have them the encyclopedia would drown in articles on everybody's garage bands, kids, pets, school projects, etc etc.  I seem to recall a recent AfD discussion mentioning that there were something like 5000 indoor soccer teams active in the UK alone - can you imagine the effect on WP if we let every such team, not just in the UK but in the whole soccer-playing world, have an article.....? ChrisTheDude 10:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The two sources cited at the bottom of the Deportivo page (there was a third, but it was a link to the article on the stadium which is bundled with this one for AfD purposes) consist of a series of forum posts and a directory entry proving that the club exists. We can thus be reasonably sure that it's not a hoax (although the flagicons of some of the players still seem unusual). We cannot, however, be sure of the notability of the team. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment The source prove the Northcote League exist, but seem like a Sunday league football. But still no source support for the team itself. Matthew_hk   t  c  10:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You're quite right. My eyes are playing tricks on me BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, look, i understand what all of you guys are saying. And yes, i understand that you guys now know the team and league exists. This really means a lot to a lot of people. You have no idea.


 * 1.) regarding the picture, it is copyrighted for 7 years, under the Australian copyright act that any picture produced in Australia is of automatic copyright for 7 years, so please dont insult me on that.


 * 2.) Ok, can we please reach an agreement, I havn't been lieing about anything here at all. The only semi-lie ive/weve told is the on eregarding estadio Northcetti. The place is actually (as im sure you all know) "Insportz Northcote" and we just made up the northcetti for fun. ill remove that now, and replace it with Insports Northcote - and Wont make a wiki for that. Please let this stay, it does no harm, really. It is a serious and yes, notable thing. Im not sure where you guys are from but if you were from Melbourne you would be aware - although, if you were a football fan (as that also applies to any league in the world)


 * Please reconsider.
 * Kind Regards
 * Dozzaddemar


 * You still need to address the failure of the article (as it stands) to meet the requirements of WP:N and especially WP:V. Your argument seems to hinge on the team being "big in Melbourne" - presumably if this is the case then you can cite coverage it has received in Melbourne newspapers, which would go a long way to satisfying WP:V ChrisTheDude 12:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You see, this is my problem, as you can probably guess i've exumed all internet resources. When i say big i dont mean everyone in the state knows, but to the football fraternity it is known. Local community newspapers do not publish their articles on the net. which leads me to my second point - you guys rely too much on the internet. Not all sources are internet. Is there a way for me to take a photo of my medal, then scan it on and imageshack it to be viewed. Note: i am being serious there, are there other ways of providing sources other than pre-made url links. i will take the photo if it means you'll allow the deportivo wiki in.
 * Regards
 * D.D.
 * You may provide citations that are not on the Internet, as long as they can be found elsewhere. What's most important is that they show that the subject meets the requirements listed previously.  --Maxamegalon2000 15:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

DEM OUT! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dozzaddemar (talk • contribs) 07:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC).
 * A photograph of a medal is not a reliable source, you need to cite coverage which the subject has received from independent third parties as per WP:N which reads: A topic is notable if it has been the subject of secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, independent of the subject and independent of each other. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial, or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability ChrisTheDude 15:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. It's one team of many, from one location of many, from one city of many.  One of the referenced websites lists nearly 20 sports centers in the Melbourne area, and this appears to be a team from a league at only one of those locations. Gregorytopov 17:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)  Further comment: The user who posted the article is Domenic Demaria, one of the players on the team.  He is a 15 year old who posts in forums at football.co.uk, see all his posts here: http://forum.football.co.uk/search.php?search_id=1019827224&start=25 - which includes a post that mentions his age.  With team members identified with names like "Billy" and opponents like "Jacob's Team", it seems clear this is just a local team composed of 15 year old amateurs at best.  Claims in a forum post about the team being the subject of a Sportsnet article seem unverifiable and fabricated.  The evidence points strongly to a non-notable amateur team like thousands worldwide, and a vanity article from the author about his teenager friends.  To use the author's own words: "a bunch of 15 y.o playing 14-many 18 y.o.'s" Gregorytopov 17:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - if the most notable thing about this club is that it owns a medal of some kind then it's not worth including. Qwghlm 17:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete nn team of a level equivalent to Sunday League. Oldelpaso 18:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Creator's repeated and exhaustive arguments boil down to nothing much; no matter how important he claims this team is, if he can't provide any sources at all (never mind verifiable or credible ones), then we're talking, as others have said, of a pickup duffers' league at best.  Even amateur leagues get some major press coverage, if they're significant enough.  This hasn't, so it isn't.  Ravenswing 19:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete A7 (club, with bio by extension for others). Tagged where appropriate. --Dennisthe2 21:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Maxamegalon2000 06:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How about this, everyone can go and get effed. This is fukn wiki for gods sakes. You guys sit on this computer all day long, go to hell. Wiki is shit, i cant even site it in a bibliography at school it is seen that much as a joke. You guys are no better than a bunch of forum mods, who sit on their computer all day. Delete it if you want, you guys are morons, who sit on a computer all day, trying to improve shit wiki. Wiki is a joke, Do you guys know how many wiki play ons there are, you are jokes. go back to wikiland, and stop trying to improve wiki, its a laughing stock - all over the world.
 * Comment: Wikipedia is materially improved every time someone with a chip on his shoulder gets into a hissy fit, the moment he finds that policies apply to him too, and takes a hike.  Editors who can handle the principle that their work is subject to quality standards and editing are assets.  As with any other contributor, it's up to you which you wish to be.  Ravenswing 14:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete the stadium per WP:V. i've already speedied the team per CSDs G4 and A7.  young  american  (ahoy hoy) 15:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I can see the A7, and definitely as above I am a 'delete', but can't see any evidence for G4 (unless I'm missing something, which is quite possible!) - fchd 13:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Here.  young  american  (ahoy hoy) 13:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I was missing something. Good work. - fchd 16:07, 8 March 2007 (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.