Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flair Utd. F.C.

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Paul August &#9742; 18:26, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Flair Utd. F.C.
Vanity - just some 5-a side football team, of which there are millions. Nothing particularly notable about them as far as I can see. sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 15:07, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Excellent entry. I've been trying to find information on Flair for some considerable time. They're well known around the East London area. &mdash; (Unsigned comment by 217.43.11.192; user's 1st edit.)
 * What?! Ashibaka (tock) 16:12, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I've restored sjorford's original nomination, which was removed when 217.43.11.192 added his/her comment, possibly inadvertantly. android  79  16:36, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. No indication of notability, possible vanity. android  79  16:36, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Sjorford. -D. Wu 16:42, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete,. clearly an advertisment &mdash; (Zbzdhbafr forgot to sign.)
 * delete vanity --Tim Pope 19:20, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it! The thing that makes Wikipedia better than any other encyclopædia is that it contains entries that may be only interesting to a smaller population. The entry is factual and non-slanderous. By voting for removal of entries like this you are removing the whole essence of Wikipedia. Every 5-a side football team should have their own Wikipedia page, thus helping to complete vast information database that we are working for. Vanity? I would have to disagree. The entries that we should be deleting are the ones that are clearly fictitious, not the ones that are just less interesting to the general populace. -Martin Butt 19:18, 13 August 2005 (UTC) &mdash; (MartinButt's 1st edit.)
 * Delete non-notable as per Sjorford. Qwghlm 13:37, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * keep - let's have all clubs affiliated to the FA Jooler 07:02, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Seriously? That's tens of thousands of outdoor 11-a-side clubs, even before you get to indoor teams like this one.. sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 14:29, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * So what? Like MartinButt said, the essence of Wikipedia is compiling this wonderfully vast source of knowledge and information. So where is the sense in rejecting a particular genre of entry just because it has a large number of constituents? Surely opening Wikipedia up to the world of amateur football (as an example) can only be of benefit to the knowledge-seeking populace? Or put another way, what harm/detriment can come from accepting such entries? None. It is simply another step towards making Wikipedia the greatest source of information this world has ever experienced. 7killer7 00:25, 22 August 2005
 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.