Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MetroNation


 * 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 of the debate was No consensus. Even discounting the invalid vote, it is a 50-50 split between deleting and keeping (slight edge to delete). Note that you don't need an AfD to determine a merge vs. keep. Deathphoenix 15:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

MetroNation
 Delete as non-notable; if not deleted it should be tagged with for advert. I don't see a reason why every fan club should have its own article. Isopropyl 23:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC) Comment: Look at Category:Major League Soccer fan clubs. If this article is deleted, so should all others in that category. Perhaps all of them can be merged onto one page? DR31 (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC) Just becuase your anti-soccer doesn't mean things should deleted... &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.251.221.247 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Delete due to lack on notability. Bobby1011 00:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as above.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not delete This is a legitimate article about a not-for-profit incorporated organization. You shouldn't try to delete it simply because you don't happen to care for its focus. Irishapple21 23:11 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: above voter is the original author of the article. Isopropyl 04:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable.  OhNo itsJamie Talk 04:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Why the hell would this be deleted? This may be a niche topic, but it is a topic that AMerican soccer fans care about. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.90.51.173 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Delete until they can add a few zeros on their 81 unique Googles. And not by using Wikipedia, either. Just zis Guy you know? 10:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Do not delete One of Wikipedia's purposes is to provide a space for all information, both prominent and otherwise. It is irresponsible to judge the value of any article relative to that of others; they all deserve a place on Wikipedia. 220.217.23.111 15:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Really? I wonder why they went to all the trouble of writing WP:NOT then? Just zis Guy you know? 17:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * NOT is clear. There is no practical limit to the scope of Wikipedia.  It does mention that advertisements don't belong, and the advertising aspect of this page is debatable, but that can be remedied via NPOV.  You are advocating, however, the outright deletion and ban of the information relating to MetroNation.  I doubt very much that your motives have anything to do with the integrity of Wikipedia.220.217.23.111 17:28, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Keep It- This is a legit group that deserves its own recognition you soccer hating bastards &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.193.79.35 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Keep per Irishapple21 &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Siva1979 (talk &bull; contribs).

Keep Supporter groups are part of soccer culture. There are articles for supporter's groups outside the US. As this relates to soccer in the US (considered by some as being on the periphery of American sports), a case could be made that this nomination is a good example of systemic bias. --Elliskev 17:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * A great argument for an article on soccer supporters groups! A bad argument for an article on a single group with no apparent claim to notability.  Oh, and some of us think football is played with a round ball, and what the Americans do with a rugger ball is a complete mystery. Systemic bias?  Only against the trivial.  Just zis Guy you know? 18:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * So what you are saying is that you aren't opposed to soccer in general (which is the American name for the sport coined by a British student at Oxford in the 1880s and shortened from "Association Football"), but instead to the American involvement in soccer because you are offended by our interest in "your" sport. Well, this attempt at bias shouldn't be tolerated.  If you delete MLS supporters groups, you should also erase every listing for a supporters group for every other league in the world.  Here are listings for supporters groups from just a few countries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Canaries, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Clouds, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_in_Luton, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poskoci, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartan_Army, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_04, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasz_KS, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowcy_Hordy_Edwarda.  I could list hundreds of others on Wikipedia if necessary, but I think you get the point.  MetroNation is as legitimate an organization as any other listed by Wikipedia; Its members have raised thousands of dollars for Hurricane Katrina relief funds, cancer and multiple sclerosis treatment and the promotion of youth soccer in the United States through the US Soccer Federation's PassBack Program.  Since both precedence and Wikipedia's NOT policy both support its continued existence, there is no reason for MetroNation's entry to be deleted. Irishapple21 13:55, 23 February 2006 (UTC) &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.228.35.62 (talk &bull; contribs) . (The preceding comment was submitted by an anonymous IP, likely because Irishapple21 did not sign in. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk  12:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC))
 * Obviously a supporters group for the MetroStars is going to seem/be somewhat trivial to somebody in the UK (Reading fan?). What is the standard of notability for a suppoter group? --Elliskev 18:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Do not delete I'm really surprised that this is even up for deletion. Soccer supporter groups are known throughout the world, MetroNation is one of them, it's new, but so what?  I agree with Ellis about systemic bias on this issue.--Milicz 17:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep As a soccer fan (DC United), but not a supporter's group memeber, I do think that the supporter's groups play a role in soccer culture around the world, and an emerging role in the United States. Consider the article on tifo. Yes, MetroNation is a smaller group right now, but given the somewhat strange history of the Empire Supporter's Club, there is almost enough material for an article there alone.  That being said, incorporating supporter's groups content into the club pages seems a reasonable measure until such a time as the amount of unique NPOV content with a utility seperate to that of the team is sufficient to support a unique article.  --ZoomZip 18:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I can agree with the case to merge. --Elliskev 18:49, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * As a quick addendum, I would be even more comfortable with a vote to Keep if the article were more specific in terms of what MetroNation has done and what recognition it has achieved, in accordance with Wikipedia's long-standing views on notability. I think there's the seeds of material there, but it has not been stated in a way that makes the case easy to make.  For instance, Barra Brava notes the recognition it received when Christian Gomez joined them in the stands at Giants Stadium.  For someone reading an article on that event, which received play in multiple media settings, they might well turn to WP in order to determine what on god's green earth a "Barra Brava" was.  The MetroNation article, if it could provide examples of instances in which it was notable or viewable, could then make a case against deletion on notability grounds much easier to make.  --ZoomZip 19:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Notable Please see here for news release on the official MetroStars site regarding the group. MLS seems to know about them... --Elliskev 22:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
 * That (and the rewrite) helps me. Removing "tenative" from my "keep" comment --ZoomZip 22:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep excellent article, why the hell would anyone want to delete it?  Grue   18:59, 25 February 2006 (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.