Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kingston Stockade Football Club (Stockade FC)


 * 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) 02:03, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Kingston Stockade Football Club (Stockade FC)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Fails notability guidelines. Not a fully professional team. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:30, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    21:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    21:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. — Jkudlick t c s 23:25, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick t c s 23:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - There is recent precedent and current consensus that 4th-tier clubs in the United States are notable due to being eligible to compete in the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup. I personally do not agree with it, but that is the current consensus. (See Articles for deletion/Grand Rapids FC, Articles for deletion/Real San Jose, Articles for deletion/San Francisco Stompers FC, Articles for deletion/AFC Ann Arbor, and Articles for deletion/Spartans Futbol Club.) — Jkudlick t c s 23:32, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep 4th tier Clubs in US football are notable and further are eligible to playing in the Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as above, recent consensus shows clubs playing at this level are considered notable. Needs renaming though. GiantSnowman 18:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Information provided above seems to provide recent proof of a consensus on this particular topic. BobbyAFC (talk) 02:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - I dePRODed it because I thought it needed more discussion and possibly improvement. Now !voting keep given that it appears to be covered by consensus. VMS Mosaic (talk) 03:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment What a load of fecal matter. This club is not yet notable. Just because other teams at this level may be notable is no reason that this club is. It's like saying that because two musicians are on the same label that they're both notable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:32, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think these semi-pro teams - specifically NPSL clubs - are an important part of the American soccer landscape. Though the article name should definitely be changed. American Money (talk) 15:09, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment It's not about importance but notability. See WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - current consensus is that teams at this level are notable. Fenix down (talk) 13:00, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Show me that this team is notable not that other teams may be notable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Well aside from the fact that consensus is that teams in that league are inherently notable, two seconds on google shows:
 * this
 * this
 * and this for coverage of the start of the club which is more than adequate for content. Fenix down (talk) 17:10, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:LOCAL coverage. Fine. But again, just because other teams at this level are notable does not mean that all teams at this level are notable. You've all drunk the kool aide and have lost the capacity to think independently and critically. WP:GNG must be met not some esoteric concept that they should be notable so we will say that they are. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:45, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * You might want to have another look at WP:LOCAL as that is an essay on places, not organisations. It does however contain a quote from the guideline WP:N that states: "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." The sources provided above are reliable, independent sources providing significant coverage of a club that plays in a league, the participants in which are eligible for national competition. you initial deletion rationale is fatally flawed, there is no guideline, nor any wider consensus that full professionalism is a benchmark for club notability. Fenix down (talk) 08:41, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I never claimed it was anything but an essay but it's the spirit of the essay that applies. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:57, 4 December 2015 (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.