Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newport County Borough


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 09:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Newport County Borough

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article originally PROD'ed with the rationale "Club has never played in the top 10 levels of the English football league system or in a national cup as required by WP:FOOTY. Infobox currently states the club plays in the West Midlands (Regional) League Premier Division but this is not true" but PROD removed by article creator without explanation, so to AfD it comes. For the record, no sources found to pass GNG either for this very small-time local amateur team. ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 11:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. The highest level this team has played at is Level 13 of the English football league system, and so misses the cut-off point. No entries on the FCHD and precious little third-party coverage makes them non-notable. Bettia   (rawr CRUSH!)  11:15, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Funny you should say that, I'm on a week's leave at the moment, and gathering Shropshire League information for adding to the FCHD is one of the tasks I've set myself for this week (along with expanding West Cheshire League data and setting up some North Berks League club records). - fchd (talk) 11:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Yet more proof that PRODs removed without a rationale should be considered invalid and reinstated. пﮟოьεԻ   5  7  11:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. BTW, I agree with Number 57. PRODs removed without rationale and/or article improvement should be reinstated (borders on vandalism). -- Alexf(talk) 11:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. But I disagree about prods being removed. Any prod article will likely be quickly restored if someone objects, so if someone is willing to remove a prod, it's best dealt with permanently (if there such a thing) here. AfD is a quick and easy process. Nfitz (talk) 02:28, 18 October 2008 (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.