Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Arsenal red cards under Arsène Wenger


 * 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. Red card.  Sandstein  19:43, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

List of Arsenal red cards under Arsène Wenger

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Pure WP:NOTSTATS and WP:LISTCRUFT. GiantSnowman 09:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 09:13, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - Would List of Arsenal red cards in the Premier League be an acceptable alternative? Spiderone  10:56, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * For me, no. GiantSnowman 10:59, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm struggling to see how this fails WP:LISTCRUFT since there are plenty of reliable sources used from BBC, Guardian, Times etc. about their disciplinary record as well as comments from the chairman and manager themselves, in particular the one about Wenger's 'selective vision' which suggest that this is a possible topic of interest. Which of the 12 listcruft reasons do you think applies to this article? Spiderone  11:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * 1, 2, 3... GiantSnowman 11:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well it's not a 'random' list as I've explained below. It may interest a limited number of people, but when the next Arsenal player gets sent off you will undoubtedly have the newspapers/BBC keeping count of it, and one site publishing an updated list. Lemonade51 (talk) 12:15, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. I don't see a full list of red cards in any of the sources, so I don't see how this is a notable topic. – PeeJay 11:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, well there isn't a full sourced list for this. Is this a notable topic? (Of course I know it is.....) But just one glance it says Igors Stepanovs won a league medal, but he didn't receive one during the trophy presentation. The Arsenal website incorrectly says he did though. Lemonade51 (talk) 12:15, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep – naturally, although I admit the list is more slanted to Wenger's first period at Arsenal (42 red cards in five-and-a-half years). For me it's notable when the club chairman criticised the record in public, and a leading football correspondent called it appalling. This doesn't have to be a negative connotation of Wenger's management style, as his teams behaviour have improved, they have won numerous Fair Play awards and a high proportion of the cards issued were not acts of malice, but provocation. The introduction attempts to highlight this. But the high number of red cards are an anomaly for a manager who sets up teams to play intricate football. It was the subject of discussion almost every week in the English press, and Arsenal's 12 red cards in 2001–02 set the bar in the English division. Again this list is not something pulled out of thin air – there are incarnations of the tally on t'internet. Plus I see how this fails WP:LISTCRUFT. Lemonade51 (talk) 11:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I would prefer if the article did not focus on one particular manager because this could lead to a dangerous precedent being set. For example, we could end up seeing articles like "List of Liverpool red cards under Brendan Rodgers" and it could get out of hand. I feel that the references used mean that this passes WP:GNG and I don't think it's necessarily a big issue if none of the sources themselves list all of the red cards. For example, how many sources in the Rooney international goals article listed all of Rooney's goals?
 * If this article is kept then I think it needs to be moved to List of Arsenal F.C. red cards under Arsène Wenger Spiderone  12:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per comments on Wikiproject Football; Can you imagine having an entire article dedicated to Fergie Time? No. Instead it's part of a larger topic i.e. Alex Ferguson. How about the an article about Utd's worst start to a Premier League season? No. Instead it's part of a larger topic i.e. David Moyes. By splitting this topic from the actual content of a biography A. it neatly circumvents balance and npov B. is almost certainly undue C. contributes practically nothing.
 * It's an interesting biographical note that should be dealt with as part of his biography, along with discussions about how he changed Arsenal from being "boring boring", his contributions to cosmopolitan nature of the Premier League, and his title successes. Y'know. Context. Koncorde (talk) 13:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I would further add that his article appropriately summarises the key points in 10 sentences or less, and provides context for the "Fair Play" aspect. Koncorde (talk) 13:33, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The introduction provides context. One point raised is Arsenal won the league in 2002 with a record number of dismissals, which in itself tells you something. There is an article to United's worst start to a Premier League season, it's entitled 2013–14 Manchester United F.C. season. And whose to say there won't be an article (or books) dedicated to 'Fergie Time' in 20 years? – though I agree it would be best summarised in the manager's profile. One solution to your "balance" concern would be to link the list to the "Team indiscipline and fair play" section of Wenger's page. As for contributes "nothing", the list on its own doesn't but the prose/trend does. Arsenal have changed their act under Wenger; they are still prone to taking provocative action, but they don't lose a man at a rate of one every three games like before. Again, it's for you to draw your own conclusions. Lemonade51 (talk) 14:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * No, the context is Arsene Wenger, not a list. Your example of the 2013–14 Manchester United F.C. season does not help as again the start is treated within the context of the larger (and more significant) season which is the whole point being made. And no linking the list is not the solution, by all means merge the content (with due weight) to the fair play section - but once you have done that the specific red cards themselves are really irrelevant. Koncorde (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - I fail to see how this is notable. Pure trivia and listcruft. JMHamo (talk) 13:58, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not notable. Kante4 (talk) 15:37, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - but move to List of Arsenal F.C. red cards in the Premier League or other manager-neutral name. The list is well referenced, and a number of claims regarding Arsenal's red card record, indicates criterias for general notability is met. List of international goals scored by Wayne Rooney is comarable, where not a single goal is notable at it's own. The only thing I think is missing in the article, is a good reference confirming all the red cards in a given period is included in the list. Grrahnbahr (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete An article on the titular subject would not require a detailed list. The article matter goes no where, selective in it's narrative and the list is just...a list. Leaky  Caldron  17:02, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: I don't know (and I can't even understand) why such a list exists. This is not an important statistic, more like a trivia that commentators talk about during a match. MYS  77  ✉ 17:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to be a WP:COATRACK for criticism of Wenger. Number   5  7  20:04, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, worth mentioning in Wenger's biography (and relevant Arsenal FC season articles) that Arsenal had poor discipline in the early part of his tenure, but not a notable standalone list. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:11, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with nominator's opinion that it fails WP:LISTCRUFT and WP:NOTSTATS. This appears to also be a WP:COATRACK article and is hardly of encyclopedic notability. — Jkudlick t c s 22:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as pure WP:LISTCRUFT. ~ RobTalk 03:42, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:LISTCRUFT and WP:NOTSTATS. Fenix down (talk) 12:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * delete way beyond the scope of what is appropriate for an encyclopedia -- ℕ  ℱ  12:59, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - go get a blog! --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 14:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - great amount of references. RealDealBillMcNeal (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete it is not being recommened for deletion for lack of references, it is being deleted for WP:NOT. --Bejnar (talk) 03:38, 21 September 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.