Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeanfield Swifts 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 Keep ZsinjTalk 22:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Jeanfield Swifts F.C.

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Amateur junior football club. Ordinarily those are nonnotable, but this one has been around since 1928 so I'm more comfortable with AFD than speedy here. NawlinWiki 19:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Although this club has been around since 1928, there isnt much content about it. Its merely a list with the squad and club committee members. I wouldnt have thought its notable to anyone outside the local area. Id maybe change my mind if there were some details whats so notable and great about this club, as the article in its present state is at best a glorified list. --PrincessBrat 19:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete totally non notable and fails WP:CORP. Being formed in 1928 is not notable or unusual, most pub teams can trace roots back further than that. Nuttah68 19:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - "Junior" in the Scottish context does not mean Under-18 players or anything like that. The Scottish Junior F.A. to which Jeanfield are affilated adminsters most of what would be "non-league" football in England. Several Junior clubs get much larger crowds than Scottish League Division Three, but there is no mechanism for them to move to come under the jurisdiction of the SFA and join the Scottish League. The Scottish Junior Cup final often draws a 5-figure crowd and is shown live on Scottish TV. If they were situated south of Hadrian's Wall, a club of this stature would be notable. Don't be put off by the word "Junior". In my opinion, all SJFA clubs would count as notable (there's another level, Scottish Amateur Football below that, and I certainly wouldn't vote to keep any club at that level) - fchd 19:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to respond as an Englishman to the Hadrians Wall comment - which was out of order. If this club is so great and attracts big crowds, why is the article so short and has nothign to offer? Id be prepared to retract my view if more detail is put into the article but I have doubts that it will. --PrincessBrat 20:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's actually quite a long article for a junior club. I started the article and haven't had much assistance along the way, not least due to the club's website being pulled by its board. - Dudesleeper · Talk 20:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You might find some info worth adding here..... Just noticed it's already shown as a source..... 11:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * "Out of order"? If you think so, I apologise, but the point I was trying to make was that if this club were playing in an English League of a roughly equivalent standard, say the North West Counties League, there would be no prospect of deletion (e.g. See Holker Old Boys F.C. or Leek CSOB F.C.), and rightly so. - fchd 21:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * PrincessBrat, get over yourself. In what way was Richard's comment "out of order"?  He was merely pointing out that this is a club of similar stature to the hundreds of English non-league clubs that are on Wikipedia at present.  He has quite eloquently explained what the term "junior" football means in a Scottish context, and that for me should suffice to keep the article.  By the way, that means I say keep as well.  As for your comments about the article being short - that surely isn't a basis for deletion.  Otherwise we have to go around deleting every stub article that exists on the website!  furthermore the length of any article is purely a subjective matter and no basis for deletion. - Big Jim Fae Scotland 11:03, 7 March 2007
 * Yeah, I somehow doubt that Richard's off on some crusade against England, English people, or English football given that he comes from the West Country (of England) himself.... ChrisTheDude 11:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I still hold my view regardless of him being Scottish or English that it was unneccasary comment as it implied bias on articles that are English over Scottish. Also I must say there is only people in the local area or maybe someone with a keen interest in Scottish sides that could expand this article, snice the website is non-existant, and there isnt mucgh to go on on the google search. Id say there is more info on the under 19s side website. Im still holding my view of it being a glorified list - the intro seems reasonable but beyond that the article doesnt serve any purpose at the state its in at the moment and I dont see what use it is on here. The honours section is fine but its the middle content thats missing and I still hold by my view if someone could stick some info in this middle bit Id have no problems with the article. I note the two football teams from Big Jim do have some general all be it short info but they are not just a list of Squad and Management --PrincessBrat 11:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * a) You have no idea whether I'm English, Scottish or Papua New Guinean. However, you are correct - my comment did imply bias on articles that relate to English teams over Scottish teams, and I'll do more than imply it - I'll state it clearly here and now. Going back to the point, the article may be short, but what there is can be notable and verifiable and expandable by those who have more knowledge of the subject than I. Nothing in your argument gives any reason for a 'delete' consensus. - fchd 12:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't get so worked up over this fchd, it's only a non-notable article after all. Also, I took the liberty of reading your profile page and note your interest in this field and also that you're an Englishman. The article has been there since September and in 6 months nothing much added on. Hence why it's worthy to be done away with. It's likely if it hadn't been nominated for deletion that it would remain in a poor state and if anything this has helped it in some way. I think if you read what I've written you will see my reasons for agreeing with deletion, and I don't really care if you think they are right or wrong, I am entitled to state what I think. Instead of revisiting your biased comment and justifying it, I think you should use something better of your time. --PrincessBrat 14:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Where on my profile does it state that I'm an Englishman? It says I live in Bideford. As a matter of fact I don't consider myself English at all, but you weren't to know that. I still think (while you are certainly entitled to your opinion), that your reasons for deletion are wrong - the fact that's it been there since September and in 6 months nothing much has been added on - do not meet any of the policy criteria for deletion. And I'll decide what I do with my time thank you very much. You're the one getting worked up, saying my original comment was "Over the top", using phraseolgy like "biased" etc. If I see I'm being pilloried, I reserve the right to explain, justify and defend myself. My interest after all, is primarily in the football clubs of England & Wales. My original comment stands, if this club and article was in an English context, this AfD would simply not have happened. - fchd 16:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * My point on 6 months was that its been there that long and remained a list! Thats fact. It really cannot be that notable if there isnt much there - dont you think, otherwise there would be lots to say about the club? In response if this was an English club, on that Ive read some of the articles on those clubs as well in lower/ameteur leagues and if I was doing an encyclopedia myself Id have them deleted as well as they are not notable, just like this club. --PrincessBrat 17:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Its notability is what we're currently deciding on, so your claim is incorrect. Also, if Alex Ferguson's article isn't edited for six months, does it become non-notable as well? - Dudesleeper · Talk 15:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * To dudesleeper if Alex Fergusons article is not edited for 6 months there is no issue, but his article would have notable content in it which would be valid after 6 months. At some point they wont be anything left to say about him as it would all be in the article! I would never support a nomination if it was unedited for 6 months but had notable content in it. What Im saying here is this article has had 6 months for someone to put some notable content in and there has been a failure to do that. --PrincessBrat 17:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You're confusing notability with popularity, and it's making you appear naive. - Dudesleeper · Talk 19:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Dont accuse me of being naive becuase I managed to argue your point and you cant respond. If you cant make further comments about an arguement in a reasonable manner dont respond back at all --PrincessBrat 22:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Rrrright. Your claims are there for all to read. - Dudesleeper · Talk 22:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added some more stuff in the middle of the article, hope this helps.... ChrisTheDude 12:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - per fchd. Lazy nomination. - Dudesleeper · Talk 20:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - per fchd. ArtVandelay13 20:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - per fchd.  Archibald99   20:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep though Comment: We should probably have a rule for how far down the Scottish football pyramid clubs automatically remain notable, in the same way as the English one (Level 10 being the limit IIRC). In Scotland at the moment, we appear to have Levels 1-4 (Scottish Premier/Scottish Leagues 1-3), Level 5 (Highland League etc.), followed by Junior football.  Now are all the Junior league on one level (notable), or are there many levels, some of which would be notable, some not?  Would someone more knowledgeable like to offer a guideline?  Eliminator JR   Talk  23:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * There are three regions: West (four tiers), East (three tiers) and North (also three). I'll defer to someone with more knowledge as to their notability, as I'm a relative newcomer to Scottish junior football's finer points. I'll enquire with Big Jim Fae Scotland, who started the SJFA article. - Dudesleeper Talk 23:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's difficult to place the SJFA clubs alongside the SFA ones, as I've said above, there isn't a mechanism for any interchange between the two. I'd certainly place them at least alongside the Highland clubs etc. If they were in England, I'd expect all but the bottom few North Region clubs to pass the notability claims, and as that would exclude so few I'd be inclined to include them as well to complete the "set". - fchd 05:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * As I have been mentioned here maybe I should post to sat that I agree with everything Richard (fchd) has said. We cannot readily categorise Scottish football at being at "levels" the same way as we can in England due to the absence of a pyramid system.  However, if we were going to try and categorise the clubs as belonging to levels (or tiers) then we could probably identify eight in total (bearing in mind that this is purely my unofficial interpretation and there is no link between levels four and five, and the levels five to eight are wholly unconnected from one another except for some cup competitions), as follows:


 * Level One (1 league, 1 division): Scottish Premier League
 * Level Two (1 league, 1 division): Scottish Football League First Division
 * Level Three (1 league, 1 division): Scottish Football League Second Division
 * Level Four (1 league, 1 division): Scottish Football League Third Division
 * Level Five (6 leagues, 6 divisions): Highland Football League; East of Scotland Football League Premier Division; South of Scotland Football League; Juniors West Region Super League Premier Division; Juniors East Region Super League; Juniors North Region Premier Division
 * Level Six (4 leagues, 4 divisions): East of Scotland Football League First Division; Juniors West Region Super League First Division; Juniors East Region Premier Division; Juniors North Region First Division
 * Level Seven (3 leagues, 6 divisions): Juniors West Region Central First Division; Juniors West Region Ayrshire Division; Juniors East Region South Division; Juniors East Region Central Division; Juniors East Region North Division; Juniors North Region Second Division
 * Level Eight (1 league, 1 division): Juniors Eest Region Central Second Division

That is probably clear as mud to most people who aren't familiar with the intracate details of the bizarre way in which Scottish football has evolved. However, if we are determined to classify football clubs at belonging to some level or another then I think we can readily identify eight such "levels".

At any rate, I am firmly of the opinion that all "junior" clubs in Scotland are noteworthy and merit inclusion on Wikipedia. Indeed, I have written many of these articles myself and would be royally peed off if someone blithely started deleting them because they hadn't heard of the club themselves, or because the article is somehow too "short".

That's my tuppence worth anyway!

Big Jim Fae Scotland, 11:22, 7 March 2007

Delete - I feel the article should be deleted as Jeanfield Swifts are not a notable club whatsoever. They are comprised of amateur players in Scotland and there are better amateur teams in existence. Wikipedia has to draw the line when a team becoms not notable. I could argue that many amateur teams are a lot bigger than the 'junior' team Jeanfield swifts and attract bigger crowds. Having watched them a couple of times there are not any more than 40 people at their home games, at the very most. I'd say the average number is around 20. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.43.13.100 (talk • contribs)
 * I'd say the average number is around 20. Which is around, oh, ten more than St. Johnstone get. Another reason for their notability. - Dudesleeper · Talk 15:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Intelligent comment. Great contribution. (199.43.13.101 12:23, 8 March 2007 (UTC))


 * Further clarification of the term "junior".  Archibald99   15:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * And one more point is that junior teams may well be eligible to enter the Scottish Cup soon.  Archibald99   00:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, I understand all of the above arguments and this debate becomes a larger one of weather or not a Scottish junior level club is notable. I have to say, as an American, that if USL PDL and NPSL teams are worthy of an page so is a Scottish club of comparable notablity. м info 04:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per fchd. The main SJFA article makes clear that "junior" is not in reference to "under-18" (or even "under-21"). -- Black Falcon 08:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions.
 * 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.