Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Adidas sponsorships


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. To the IP editor with a question, I would recommend starting discussions on the talk pages for those articles. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: - as the article has more than 5000 revisions, it will have to be deleted by a steward - I have submitted a request here. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:32, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

List of Adidas sponsorships

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Same reasons as Articles for deletion/List of Puma sponsorships and Articles for deletion/List of Asics sponsorships, primarily WP:OR, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTADVERTISING Joseph2302 (talk) 12:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising, Companies, Sports, Lists,  and Germany. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. The reason I made this article was because back in 2007, the list was included in the Adidas-article itself (see here). For reasons of WP:UNDUE, I created a separate article for the sponsorships itself. When the "Sponsorships"-section of the main article gets bloated again (which happens from time tot time), we can cut it down easily, and referring to the sponsorship-article as the appropriate aplace to mention the sponsorships. When we lose that, my fear is that the Adidas-article will be a bloated mess again.
 * On top of that, WP:NOTADVERTISING says that [i]nformation about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. I cannot think of something more objective and unbiased than a list.
 * That said, I agree that the sourcing could be improved. But that's hardly a reason to delete an article with 32 references.
 * And for the record, please also see the previous AfD.
 * Regards, Jeff5102 (talk) 12:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * An AFD from 2008, when standards were very different to now, is not sufficient reason to keep. This is just a directory list, and multiple other articles like this have been deleted recently. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Is this necessary? SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete: This is another clear cut case of WP:NOTPROMO and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Let&#39;srun (talk) 16:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete for the same reasons as other two AfD outcomes mentioned in the article. Ajf773 (talk) 09:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 19:15, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 19:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, however I disagree with the assessment on advertising, yes, Adidas is a company, however listing their sponsorships is not a form of advertising. As for 's comment above, notability is not the issue here either. You can easily source these kind of lists and there are some citations on the article. But that doesn't negative the NOTDIRECTORY policy. Govvy (talk) 10:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No, notability is the issue. GiantSnowman 15:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment While this AfD is still open, can I get a definitive answer on whether these sponsorship lists—often with little flags—are ever okay for company/brand articles, e.g. Air Jordan and Fila. If the answer is "no", should it just be a smattering of current notable sponsorships in prose? Or maybe not current, but most notable of all time? Because it looks to me like a large part of Adidas' history comes from who it sponsored.
 * 70.163.208.142 (talk) 10:02, 13 December 2023 (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.