Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of FC Seoul transfers


 * 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. Tone 20:32, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

List of FC Seoul transfers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Stats overload, blatent violation of many Wikipedia policies including WP:NOT. This nomination also extends to the spin-off lists which I will note below the original nomination, these are six sub-lists grouped by date. C 679 18:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I am listing the sub-lists here for consideration with the main article, for reasons discussed above:

C 679 18:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. C 679 19:26, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete – Transfer lists for individual clubs are not notable & total overkill, this type of content belongs in the clubs season pages. Transfer lists by nation such List of Japanese football transfers winter 2010–11 are ok however. &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 19:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - the articles fails WP:NOTSTATS and this information belongs in the individual season-articles. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Never Delete - Individual clubs transfer list is also notable. Not notable is just Cloudz679's opinion. I don' understant why do you delet detailed article? Transfer list By nation or Transfer list By club are both informative. As yo u Know I invest much time to write this article. But you want to delete by just your private opinion. private opionion was just 3-4 lines to write 1-2 minites. I really have spectisism on wikipedia. I crated andm improve this article 3 years. But this article can delete by just 2 person's private opinion to write 2 minites. In this manner Who contribute articles on wikepdia.03:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)06:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Footwiks (talk)


 * I really want to see only transfers page by club category like FC Barcelona, Manchester United. But In order to see transfers.....I have to look into club season page or League transfers page. But this page is not informative and not detailed. transfer lists are not accurate. South korea club transfer lists are not created before 2012 season. Article regarding transfers list by club are informative and important page. Dataes are too much and detailed. league transfer list page don't express detailed facts including transfer fee, trade person. dates. It can express just summary facts.. for example. A players from A team -> B team.

Please keep this article. I really invested much time. I investigated old newspapers and football magazines. If this article keep on wikipedia. Does Wikipedia go bankrupt? Take it easy. Don't happen to on wikepedia.Footwiks (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

*Keep - Merge into season articles I disagree it needs deleting it's good information and have you guys seen the club season pages? They don't mention the transfers. It's just in the wrong format. The transfer info needs to be added to the right pages, not seperated. Govvy (talk) 09:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Split - The info in these articles should be split into individual season articles about the club, which should include fixtures and results, statistics, transfers, etc. – PeeJay 23:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - not enough meaningful content or notability. GiantSnowman 11:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 00:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Information already exists at the season articles, which include relevant season information as you would expect, also unreferenced, e.g. 2012 FC Seoul season, 2013 FC Seoul season. C 679 21:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * When I first looked, I thought it wasn't there, change my vote to delete then. Govvy (talk) 22:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Before 2004 season, FC Seoul don't have all season page. Actually, I created transfer page first and somebody copied it to season page. Many people want to see transfer status at independant aritcle.Footwiks (talk)
 * No other club has a separate transfer page. C 679 23:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't accept your reason. Many people really hope other clubs have sperated and detailed transfer page. Do you know that all football clubS don't have separate season page and records page when the wikepdia began in 2006. At that time, All wikepdia controller were lik you, Maybe We can't read football club separate season page and records pages at the momment.Footwiks (talk)
 * You don't accept his reason, but I don't accept your reason. There is no reason for there to be separate articles for each club's transfer history. Create season articles or delete this content. – PeeJay 16:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:41, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 01:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Six delete votes (including me as nom), one against (author) and one author requesting split, which has already been done prior to this listing. Unsure how much more clear this discussion can be? C 679 13:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete I have to agree with C679 here. I'm not sure what the exact figure is for consensus but there doesn't seem to be any substantial objection to this deletion. The author is begging to keep a content fork that is covered elsewhere here. Funny  Pika! 14:26, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - I don't see why this relisted either, because I strongly disagree with the creator's arguments, and no one else has argued keep. Lukeno94 (talk) 18:54, 20 January 2013 (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.