Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Football in Dehradun


 * 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. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Football in Dehradun

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Original concern is still valid "Article about football in a random area. Fails notability." JMHamo (talk) 21:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 21:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable per WP:GNG. The PROD remover's rationale of "don't think it's necessarily bad to have articles about sports in a subnational entity, see e.g. Football in Catalonia" shows a deep lack of knowledge of the subject. For example, the Catalonia national football team is one of the most famous non-national representative teams in the world, and lots of notable players have represented Catalonia (see for some, Catalonia national football team for others) and the topic of 'football in Catalonia' has received significant coverage; the same cannot be said for 'football in Dehradun', not even nearly. GiantSnowman 21:34, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:57, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Looking at the article, it seems the subject could be notable, the area conatins some of the major clubs in India and as would be expected have won national competitions. However, I am not sure that the idea of "football in Dehradun" as a subject has received the required level of coverage. Concerned that the current article is more a mix of original research and synthesis. Fenix down (talk) 09:29, 25 March 2014 (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.