Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surrey & Hants Border Football League


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:11, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Surrey & Hants Border Football League

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Local amateur football league that appears to exist outside of the English football league system as far as I can tell. This is in no way different to Furness Premier Football League, Mid-Somerset Football League and Guildford and Woking Alliance League all of which were deleted for failing WP:GNG and not meeting the rule of thumb outlined at WP:FOOTYN.

I've tried multiple searches under variations of the name and found this Google News search to be the best but its two trivial mentions. Likewise in ProQuest. BNA also only contains trivial local coverage. A results roundup in a small fraction of a column on one page of the Staines & Ashford News is hardly worthy of a Wikipedia article. I mean the local school fête and Easter egg hunt would take up a similar amount of space in such a paper and we'd never dream of writing an article about those! Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Football,  and England.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:14, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: I'm not generally in favour of deleting articles but as it stands this article does not meet the standards required by Wikipedia. It is years out of date and appears to fail notability guidelines for football leagues in England. The nominator has clearly tried to find ways to improve the article but has had little success. Therefore I am unable to argue for its retention. Rillington (talk) 11:28, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 18:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as per all the previous AFDs on similar local leagues- this one doesn't pass WP:GNG either. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with Rillington that the nom has attempted to improve the article but has been unable to do so, and also that it hasn’t been kept up to date (although this can be fixed if the article is decided to be kept). However, the significant issue is the article fails WP:GNG. Fats40boy11 (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. I am not able to find significant coverage of this organization by multiple independent reliable sources. As such, this appears to fail WP:GNG. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:28, 20 August 2022 (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.