Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UEFA Champions League 2009–10 qualifying rounds


 * 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   Keep by an overwhelming argument for the keep section. Cheers,  I 'mperator 21:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

UEFA Champions League 2009–10 qualifying rounds

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

I am also nominating the following related pages:

Contested PROD for UEFA Champions League 2009–10 qualifying rounds and UEFA Europa League 2009–10 qualifying rounds, brand new AfD for other noms. Original PROD pointed to the precedent of this AfD, in which an article was deleted because it covered a round that occurred before a certain stage of the competition. The articles for which the PROD was contested covered competitions organised by the same confederation as the precedent article, while the other articles cover competitions that have a reputation that is undoubtedly less than the PRODded two. To reiterate, these articles cover stages of competitions that are too early to necessitate articles. – PeeJay 21:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. – PeeJay 21:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep They are part of the formal competition that gets plenty of media coverage (at least to the Copa Libertadores, to which I can best speak for). Can't see any good reason, even in the precedent, as to not keep it. Plus, the precedent discussed a secondary international club tournament, whereas these are rounds in the premier international club tournaments in their respective regions and are therefore more important and notable. Digirami (talk) 22:06, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you seriously telling me that, on a continental scale, the qualifying rounds of the Copa Libertadores receive as much press coverage as the group stage onwards? I seriously doubt that. – PeeJay 09:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You keep raising these points as "this is not as important as that, so this should be deleted", or "this does not need to be covered in details". Personally I've never heard of such Wikipedia editing or deletion policy. If that's such the case then most of the football-related articles (or perhaps most articles) can probably be deleted. Chanheigeorge (talk) 14:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, sure. Unlike UEFA, every member country and Mexico has a club involved in the first round. And since it is the round before the second/group stage, people want to know who they are competing against. Probably why Fox Sports en Espanol covers the first round throughout the continent, and internationally. Digirami (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep As above. The term 'qualifying' (which seems to be the problem section) seems to me to have only entered the lexicon once these tournaments added a league stage (this is certainly true for UEFA and CAF) and therefore what had merely been "first round" and "second round" etc became "first qualifying round" and "second qualifying round" etc - possibly becuase it might seem a bit odd for the start of a "league" not to consist of a league.  It would be quite wrong to somehow take it as any more of a change than this.  Even worse, in the case of CAF at least, is that all sides have to play throughout these stages of the tournament (only getting a bye when there is a need to "even up" the number of teams in the tournament - so it couldn't be claimed that it is "only for the minnows", it is really just as integral and important a part of the competition as the rest of the tournament.  As a minor compromise, combining all the qualifying rounds into a single page wouldn't be ridiculous. Jlsa (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, so CAF's qualifying rounds are relevant to all of the teams in the competition, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that UEFA themselves apportion less importance to the qualifying rounds of the Champions League and Europa League. It isn't even possible to check on goalscorers from last season's Champions League qualifying rounds on the UEFA website (see here) – PeeJay 09:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually you're not able to check any goalscorers from any round (see Final, Semi-finals, Quarter-finals, First knockout round.)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep all All these matches are integral parts of the competition, they are official matches organized and counted by their respective confederations (e.g. UEFA coefficients count qualifying round matches), goals scored in these matches are counted in official records (e.g. "Player X has scored Y goals in European competitions" count those goals). It's arbitrary to say that matches played before a certain stage of some competition are "too early" and "not important". Are you telling me that a potential Arsenal v Shaktar Donetsk match to decide who make the group stage of the premium club competetion in the world is not important? These matches are covered sufficiently in the media, and any details of these matches are reported in the official webpages and easily verifiable. Chanheigeorge (talk) 01:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree that these rounds receive as much press coverage as the later rounds. The final qualifying round may receive more coverage in the countries that have teams entering at that stage, but on a continental scale, those rounds are nowhere near as important as the group stage onwards. You say that official records count goals scored in qualifying rounds; this may be true for clubs, but UEFA records make a special distinction between goals scored in qualifying rounds and in rounds in the tournament proper. Finally, the argument could be made that any round is an integral part of the competition, so that's a null argument. So yes, there may be the odd match in the qualifying rounds that receives a lot of press coverage, but on the whole, qualifying matches are of fairly low importance. – PeeJay 09:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Only in tabulating who's the leading goalscorer of the season does qualifying matches not count. When compiling statistics, say, "Player X has scored Y goals in European competitions", UEFA does count qualifying matches, and so do the clubs. And as far as press coverage, in the countries where the clubs are competing they certainly receive sufficient coverage. Man City started from the 1st qualifying round of the UEFA Cup last year, and there is sufficient press coverage in England. Of course it is not as much as the latter rounds, but as I say, any cut-off will be arbitrary. We have pages for every FIFA World Cup qualifying round, and I doubt the early rounds of CAF or AFC gets much worldwide coverage. Chanheigeorge (talk) 13:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep all as above, these qualifying rounds are still an important part of the competition. GiantSnowman 12:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And they are covered in sufficient detail in the competitions' main articles. UEFA doesn't keep an archived record of qualifying round goalscorers on their website, so why should we? – PeeJay 12:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Who decides "sufficient detail"? You? Why do we include lineups in pages such as 2006 FIFA World Cup Group A? Aren't goalscorers sufficient enough? Chanheigeorge (talk) 15:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, do not bunch all these article up for deletion because "UEFA doesn't keep an archived record of qualifying round goalscorers on their website". If that was the case, only two articles should be up for deletion. Digirami (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. I have to agree with the above remarks of PeeJay that the first and second (and maybe even third) qualification round are just not that important to most people. Although they may receive a lot of coverage in the countries of the teams concerned, I doubt that any major sports television or radio station will spend more than a few seconds on a match between a team from Andorra and one from San Marino (with all due respect to those teams/countries). But then again, there is no strict rule (at least not to my knowledge) that makes it clear to define from which stages on the competition becomes "interesting enough" to discuss it in more detail. But maybe the question should be raised if we need these subpages at all? Is it not so that if the results are mentioned and a link to the uefa report is added, is that not enough? It seems to me the results of sports competitions tend to be represented more thoroughly and in (excessive) detail on wikipedia and gradually this becomes accepted. Notice for instance the discussion on deleting monthly results pages for major football leagues here, where the result was: "Way more detail than necessary or appropriate for Wikipedia; this is not a news archive." causing the pages to be deleted. This resulted in loads of season pages per team, as for instance Arsenal F.C. season 2006–07 which most of the times are low quality (examples here and here) and I personally doubt if they are watched a lot. If we start pages like this (which I don't object to, but we need to be careful), where do we draw the line? (PS: one could say Delete. Per WP:NOT. See number 7: Wikipedia is not "a complete exposition of all possible details".) -- Pelotas  talk  14:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that it can be debatable whether the existence of these subpages are warranted. But I think this needs a comprehensive debate so that some form of policy is developed, instead of the subjective arguments presented here for their deletion. Compared this to football players, where there is a policy reached by consensus, and once a player pass the test, nobody can say "he's not as famous as some other player, so his page should be deleted", or "there's too much detail for this unimportant player". And yes, I do have trouble understanding how these pages are worse than those "XXX F.C. season 2008-2009" pages. Chanheigeorge (talk) 15:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that is one reason why most people object to this deletion. The arguments made for deletion in the precedent, and subsequently here, are rather weak and subjective. Digirami (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep and request for revive the UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round article. Although those rounds are not the proper starting round of the competition, but they are a part of the competition, as teams are in qualifying phase - as same as the FIFA World Cup qualification. If those matches are not notable, then the FIFA World Cup qualification should be also declared not notable. Also, I hope the first round of the UEFA Cup 2008–09 can be revived as that round is a proper round of the competition. Raymond Giggs 12:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, in my opinion, the AfD of UEFA Cup 2007-08 first round is totally working under black-box. Raymond Giggs 12:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. How can you even question the merit of these articles?  The second and third qualifying rounds for the UEFA Champions League receive significant international media coverage, along with the those for the Copa Libertadores, CONCACAF Champions League and AFC Champions League.  The arguement that "...these articles cover stages of competitions that are too early to necessitate articles" is invalid.  The fact that they are preliminary rounds doesn't nullify their significance as part of the competition.  Jhantor (talk) 00:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. This has to be the most bizarre AfD I've ever seen in this project. Why would one want to remove Champions League rounds? Nfitz (talk) 04:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. If this article was for the preliminary rounds of the Saxony Cup they would have questionable merit. But we're dealing with one of the most-watched competitions outside of the World Cup. Xenon54 (talk) 17:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. The preliminary rounds needs a separate article for a better explanation of the competition. --Raymond Cruise (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2009 (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.