Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progression of England association football goalscoring record


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Progression of England association football goalscoring record
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

For the following reasons:


 * Per consensus established in this similar AfD.
 * No evidence that the topic of 'progression of ___ goalscoring record' meets the requirements for a stand-alone list as per WP:LISTN
 * There are issues with WP:NOTSTATS as well
 * Wikipedia is more than simply a mirror of RSSSF and IFFHS per WP:NOTMIRROR
 * Also borderline WP:SYNTH concerns

No prejudice against merging if a suitable target is suggested. Spiderone 16:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  16:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  16:19, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  16:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone  16:21, 10 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:SYNTH, this information is pretty much covered by other articles. Govvy (talk) 17:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge with England national football team records or similar article. GiantSnowman 20:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - there might be some material that could go into a relate article, but I agree with the points raised by the nominator. Also in my view some of the content is touching on trivia. Dunarc (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fenix down (talk) 08:13, 18 October 2020 (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.