Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israel at the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 21:35, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Israel at the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another in a series of articles by same user: Israel in [Year] [Competition]. For multi-sport competitions like the Olympics, this is notable, but not for things like this, especially when they failed to qualify. Smartyllama (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * It is suggested (by me) at wt:AFD that this AFD and many similar others be stopped and closed immediately, on basis these were not set up right. -- do ncr  am  21:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)




 * Keep - Firstly, these types of pages are extremely common and happen all the time. Are you saying that we should go around and delete Israel at the 2016 Summer Olympics because you can get info on all of these sports on the individual pages, such as Judo at the 2016 Summer Olympics? Secondly, all of the info is not found on other pages. I have added plenty of other info to the various pages you have tagged this on, not included anywhere else, such as the roster and more detail on the competition. Third your tags make no sense, you mention that others don't exist, but plenty others have. You tagged Israel's Asian Games pages but if you check here Category:Countries at the AFC Asian Cup you can see other countries have it too. All of your arguments appear to be pretty flawed. -  Galatz Talk  19:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * As mentioned, individual nations at multi-sport events like the Olympics, or even multi-event competitions like the Swimming Worlds, are notable. So Israel at the 2016 Summer Olympics is notable. But individual nations at single-event individual competitions are not notable generally, with very few exceptions. If I tagged Israel at the Asian Games, I'll withdraw it, since that's notable as a multi-sport event. I thought I only tagged the Asian Cup entries. Also, Israel at the AFC Asian Cup is notable covering the subject in general, but Israel at individual tournaments is not. Smartyllama (talk) 20:01, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry I meant Asian Cup, I miswrote. See Category:Countries at the AFC Asian Cup to see the are not the only nation. What makes Iraq notable but not Israel? In the same regard, if Asian games are then notable, why not after they switched to Euro?
 * Also my point about being available on other pages, was its not uncommon to have the overlap. I acknowledge there will be plenty, but that doesnt mean the page should be deleted. Like I mentioned, I added verbiage to most of these pages that did not exist elsewhere, and I added the rosters to many pages which were not listed on other pages. -  Galatz Talk  20:08, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned, Israel at the AFC Asian Cup, covering the subject in general across all years, is notable. Israel at the UEFA European Championship is notable as well. I did not tag either of those pages for deletion. However, articles about individual years are generally not notable for these competitions. For instance, although Iraq at the AFC Asian Cup exists and is notable, Iraq at the 2015 AFC Asian Cup does not exist, and should be deleted as non-notable if it did. Sorry if I wasn't clear about what I was saying. Smartyllama (talk) 20:14, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Based on your argument then you should nominate everything on Template:Brazil at the FIFA World Cup.
 * Again there is plenty of content on these pages not on the main page you are mentioning. The 2013 WBC roster will only be on Israel at the 2013 World Baseball Classic. If you look at Israel at the World Baseball Classic or 2013 World Baseball Classic – Qualifier 1 you will see no info on the rosters. Similarly on the 2013 page there is a huge write up on the eligibility not available anywhere else on WP. Your initial issue with these pages Here was that its just duplicate info, but thats not the case. -  Galatz Talk  20:30, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It wasn't just that the information was duplicated. It was also the fact that they're not notable, for reasons I explained. Smartyllama (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * You did not actually analyse each of the 60 cases. You copied the same AFD text. So I simply don't believe you. -- do ncr  am  23:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I get that, but the point is you aren't making arguments as to why the articles should be deleted. You are basically using WP:OSE as your rationale, however it clearly states "simply referring them to this essay by name, and nothing else, is not encouraged." You are just saying multi sport events are notable, these aren't. Can you cite reasons? Per WP:SPORTSEVENT "consider developing the topic in the existing article first until it becomes clearer that a standalone article is warranted" which is what happened. For example, you will see with WBC and World Cup I started by added more content to the main articles. As I was expanding it became very clear that there was enough information to justify its own article. -  Galatz Talk  20:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There are more than 60 similar AFDs started. There is some discussion here that there are different circumstances for at least some of them.  The way the discussion is structured (or not structured at all) is not how to sort anything out properly.  I call for this AFD and the other 60+ to be closed, administratively. -- do  ncr  am  22:03, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The debates for the articles in the collapsed list have been closed, and the article AfD notices now point here. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:13, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:27, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:27, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:27, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:27, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Trying to mass delete all these articles in a single AFD makes no sense. Some of the topics are very, very different. Keep but relist in separate AFDs. This is far to bulky to deal with. Nfitz (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * That's what I did originally. They got merged. Now you want to unmerge them? Also pinging who was the one who wanted to merge these AFDs since it was his idea, not mine. Smartyllama (talk) 17:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * You don't get to have the community apply attention, carefully consider >60 separate cases when you did not prepare adequate nominations. You copy-pasted the same AFD nomination text, acknowledging no differences of content and sourcing. Obviously sometimes it is okay/good/necessary to split out "Country at Year Event" type articles. If you had yourself done some ranking or grouping of the cases, and had then nominated a couple representative examples, I would have supported having the community give you some feedback on your reasoning. But you lose me when you effectively try to demand that community address 60 cases as if they are all the same. -- do ncr  am  23:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Merging a few FIFA event deletions might make sense - but surely huge difference between that and a European Baseball tournament (if there really is such a thing!). Though rule of thumb for something like this is to just do one, and then Prod the others if successful. Was there one previously? Nfitz (talk) 23:05, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: FIFA is a major event in this sport, there are, similarly, probably thousands of WP articles like this that briefly outline the nations competing in top-level international competition in a given sport.  Really, the wiki isn't breaking and these events are going to be covered at least in their national newspapers.  Notability easily met.   Montanabw (talk) 06:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * There are many articles about general performance at all tournaments, but very few about performance at specific tournaments, and none that I could find where the team didn't even qualify for the tournament in question. Smartyllama (talk) 11:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * But if you read WP:OSE the lack of something else on its own does not qualify for using that rationale, you cant just simply state it. It meets the criteria for WP:SPORTSEVENT and WP:GNG -  Galatz Talk  13:00, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep some: I think that we need to keep the events that Israel did qualify through to the main competition. But the rest I think that they need to be deleted. Matt294069 is coming 02:03, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * It depends on content and sourcing. Maybe it is huge news that a country did not qualify. Hmm, is this all about a quibble in titles? Where "Country at Year Event" should arguably be at longer title "Country at Year Event Qualifications"? If so then start a wp:RM. But there is merit in shorter title and redirect is needed. do  ncr  am  00:31, 16 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Nomination was simplistic and did not acknowledge any difference among >60 articles. Obviously sometimes there exist good reason to split out a "Country at Year Event" type article. Like when the is plenty of content supported by sources and when, editorially, it makes sense to explain that once and link from "Year Event" and "Country at Event" type articles. Overhead created by 60 duplicative AFDs is too much. I don't have patience to try to seriously analyze 60 cases when nominator did not. Close this unwieldy AFD with message to nominator not to Do this again. Perhaps for one or two cases (but who knows which ones) the articles' creator made a judgment to split out when another editor might have chosen to put 2 copies of the info at "Year Event" and "Country at Event" articles, but even then it would be a judgement call. Has any iota of content been disputed? I think not. -- do ncr  am  23:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep- at least procedurally, there are too many articles across too many sports for a single decision to be made here. Fenix down (talk) 11:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Procedural keep too many articles. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:56, 16 August 2016 (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.