Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giblets F.C


 * 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. Does not meet the notability guidelines, clear consensus among established editors to delete, and the single purpose accounts have failed to advance legitimate arguments based on wikipedia's policies and guidelines to support keeping the article. Davewild (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Giblets F.C

 * – ( View AfD View log )

PROD contested. Reason was: Non-notable amateur Sunday league club, fails WP:NSPORTS -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Could be speedied as an A7. Nothing suggests importance or notability. --Michig (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  -- Acather96 (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  -- Acather96 (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This one can probably go. If, as it appears, the league they play in are not notable enough for an article, then it's highly unlikely the club is. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 19:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - basically a bunch of mates getting together for a kickabout down the local leisure centre. Pretty much as non-notable as football teams can get..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - great name for a club, shame it ain't notable. GiantSnowman 15:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per nom and Michig. Also, since only contributor seems to be affiliated with the team, WP:NOT applies as well. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 16:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Per nom no notability.-- Club Oranje T 06:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * keep - Great Club, Great support, Great Passion - Giblets Till i die — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melvsta (talk • contribs) 15:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)  — Melvsta (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * keep - A fine local team, Currently has a player training youth soccer in the U.S and a few players organising a tour of New Zealand. Has a broad following of passionate fans and has inspired many around the Sutton Coldifeld area. Soccer-7's is a well established League society and has been running for many years in the Birmingham district (see external links). To brandish this team and league "non-notable" is not only offensive to the teams involved, but to small teams everywhere. duggie_1001 — duggie_1001 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep - How can people make an opinion whether this is worthy or not. Why does the standard matter? Using this ethos why don't we eradicate everything other than the premier league- RIDICULOUS ARGUMENT.  This is a celebration of a lot of individuals who play in a league against different oppositions on a weekly basis, the standard is irrelevant. People above haven't backed up their views. Pathetic. MJB.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.44.63.66 (talk) 16:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)  — 77.44.63.66 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep - Some people have far to much time on their hands. Asking for a team to be removed because your friends wouldn't play football with you of an evening doesn't mean you have to ruin the fun for everyone else. The link is to an actual league...... enough for me. This is clearly a team. Maybe not a good team, but a team nonetheless.Nwwharton2004 (talk) 16:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC) — Nwwharton2004 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Out of interest, did any of you four actually read WP:NSPORTS, which is the notability guideline for sports teams? Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, in it's own words the WP:NSPORTS "guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sportsperson, sports league, or an amateur/professional sports league organization will meet the general notability guideline" since this page documents a Club History not individuals or the orginasition the club belongs too the WP:NSPORTS does not apply. Wyndley Soccer 7's is a well documented competition within the midlands district and so fulfils the criteria of the WP:GNG of "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".Duggie 1001 (talk) 18:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid attempting to re-interpret Wikipedia's rules on notability is highly unlikely doesn't win anyone over (especially when it's coming from someone who has made no contributions to Wikipedia other than the page of your favourite local club). An article about a football club that includes three sentences about the club's history is still an article about the club. Should you be able to demonstrate that Wyndley Soccer 7s has received significant coverage in reliable sources, that might be enough for a page about that league society, but it does not mean that every club in the legaue will also get a page, because notability is not inherited. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I live within a few miles of Sutton Coldfield and I have never ever seen any coverage of the "Wyndley Soccer 7s" in any local media, it is definitely not "a well documented competition". Google turns up no coverage at all -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * An individuals failure to know of somethings existence does not prove it's non-existence. I don't think i was re-interpreting Wikipedia's rules on notability, i was quoting them as fact in turn proving that the application in which they were being correlated was not relevant.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duggie 1001 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I never disputed that the competition exists. I did, however, dispute the assertion that it is a "well documented competition".  It's entirely possible I'm wrong, though - feel free to point me to some of the press coverage that the Soccer 7s have received..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm failing to see the relevance, this is not a page dedicated to "wyndley soccer 7's" we are not quantifying the league/organisation in turn not breaching the specification set by the WP:NSPORTS "guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sportsperson, sports league, or an amateur/professional sports league organization will meet the general notability guideline" Duggie 1001 (talk) 21:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI Quote: "Soccer 7’s (Adult Football) Birmingham’s Biggest & Best competitive 7-a-side Adult Leagues". See www.birmingham.gov.uk
 * Yes, that's the website of a leisure centre doing a sales pitch. That's not independent coverage, and even if it was, no-one is going to accept a single sentence on a website amounts to significant coverage. (talk) 23:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * On behalf of myself and Giblets F.C i would like to thank you Chris Neville-Smith for your personal opinions on this matter and your generalised predictions that you understand everyone reviewing this page. I think at this point however it would be best to leave the assumptions an opinions to the people that matter at Wikipedia. I suggest if you feel the need to keep counter arguing people statements for personal gain you may consider a job in politics Duggie 1001 (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Why not have a small team of enthuiastic lads playing in a local league represented? The taem have an excellent local following and the club name is already a global talking point extending to the USA and soon to Hez Zealand and Australia.80.195.172.182 (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Because Wikipedia is not there to represent any sports team that wants an article about themselves, however enthusiastic the lads who take part may be. It is a collection of information about topics that have already been written about in reliable sources. No-one gets an article in Wikipedia on perceived worthiness. If you don't like that, Wikipedia is not the website for you. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:59, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The argument for the deletion of this article seems weak at best. The non- notability issue is rendered pointless with the external link to the league website. It has many teams in many leagues. A brief look at this website shows that 66 Teams currently play, with a new league commencing soon. That seems notable enough for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LiamBremner (talk • contribs) 18:58, 10 February 2011 LiamBremner has made no edits except for this one.
 * Then you should read the bit of the notability guideline that says the coverage must be from independent sources. That website is not independent. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 19:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Why does this website not qualify as independant, the club is not promoting the league, the article is being used for documenting the clubs history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LiamBremner (talk • contribs) 20:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Come on now Chris, what's really bothering you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nwwharton2004 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You can't !vote more than once. And please do not personalise it - your team simply isn't sufficiently notable for a Wikipedia article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The Giblets are fast becoming a worldwide phenomenon as demonstrated by the teams popularity extending to locations such as California, Fiji (of all places) and now New Zealand. I see no reason why the Giblets team should be prohibited an entry on Wikipedia as the corporation describes itsself as " a free, web-based, collaborative, multilingual encyclopedia project". Therefore, Giblets should be entitled to a page on the non profit website. (Christian) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.154.101.247 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 10 February 2011
 * Can you provide any reliable independent sources to support your assertions of international acclaim? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and per nom. If you read the policies, you might see reasons. No-one is "entitled" to a page. "The non- notability issue is rendered pointless with the external link to the league website. It has many teams in many leagues." That merely proves existence. Please read WP:RS and WP:V. If you really want to save the article, take notice of what we are saying. We are regular editors here - why would we bother using our time trying to delete something worthwhile? We try to help people with articles - when they are willing to be helped, as you seem not to be. Wikipedia is free - you didn't pay to come in. It is collaborative - this is a part of a collaborative process. Your article wasn't deleted at first sight by a supporter of Vale Madrid, or even by someone like us who had never heard of either you or them before. It's being discussed. But Wikipedia is not anarchy. It has rules. It's not free webspace - if you want that, you can get it at AboutUs or LinkedIn. Peridon (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

im from washington, ive heard of Giblets F.C, i heard it through the grapevine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Im marvin gaye (talk • contribs) 22:00, 10 February 2011 (UTC)  — Im marvin gaye (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

KEEP- definitely a notable club... wont anyone who said it wasnt feel silly when they win the Premier league. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeegs (talk • contribs) 23:47, 10 February 2011 (UTC) — Skeegs (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * This is a keeper!: What is wrong with the wiki-police? I live in the Sutton Coldfield area and have heard good things about Soccer 7s Wyndley. How do you think Clubs such as Manchester United and Real Madrid began? It all must start somewhere and I believe deletion of this page would be a huge injustice and deprive the Giblets with the platform they deserve! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.59.167 (talk) 22:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)  — 86.137.59.167 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * See WP:CRYSTAL. In the hypothetical situation where Wikipedia was around when Manchester United or Real Madrid was just starting up, no they wouldn't have had articles back then, no matter how many people in a deletion debate made unverifiable claims about hearing good things about them. They would only have got articles when they were getting enough attention for the newspapers (or something similar) to start writing about them, they joined a national league, or something similar. Wikipedia is for things that are notable now, not things that might be notable one day in the future (and certainly not for clubs that, in all probability, will never ever attain notability). Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 23:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * i would just like to say that i appreciate the support to keep the page open from all of you from around the world, i will do everything in my power to ensure that Giblets FC will one day be a household name like Chelsea. i think Duggie 1001 has made valid points and answered the questions that Chris Neville-Smith put forward to him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melvsta (talk • contribs) 00:22, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally, I'd be delighted to see a club called "Giblets" win the Premiership or the FA Cup, or whatever. And should they one day achieve such notability, I'd be very happy to help develop their Wikipedia article myself. But until then... -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:16, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * When they win the Premier League, I'll be happy to write an article for them myself :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Out of interest, why are you all so desperate to have a page on Wikipedia anyway? You do realise that, unlike your Facebook page, anyone can edit your page, and it won't necessarily be nice. It is not unheard of for people who created articles about themselves to later request deletion after someone digs up dirt about them, and in some cases the request has been refused. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 08:30, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment If an article had been put up on Wikipedia in 1880 about Newton Heath F.C. - a railway company side playing at first only against other railway company sides, it would have been deleted - especially them after being defeated 6-0 by Bolton Wanderers Reserves... Railways? Newton who? What've they got to do with this? See Newton Heath F.C. for further thrilling details. Will you get this through your heads - this is free, but it is not free webspace for every Tom, Dick, Harry, Duggie (Ryan?), or Luke (visiting America but not Marvin Gaye who's dead). This is an encyclopaedia. Edited by many hands who may be professionals in their other lives in various fields. Not a place like AboutUs or LinkedIn, where you are free to publish any gibbletish gibberish about your club. Stop drivelling and produce the references, without which your article is as doomed as Downby in the Swamp Academicals would be when they met Tottenham Hotspur (Downby have only 10 players since their goalkeeper got arrested...). Peridon (talk) 19:14, 11 February 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.