Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valley FC


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 01:12, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Valley FC

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable local football club. No sources apart from one that doesn't mention this club. gadfium 09:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  15:04, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Clearly COI by one or more editors. Not only badly written and full of OR it clearly fails RS and SIGCOV. Unless there is a guideline somewhere (I couldn't find any) that allows a semi-professional sports organisation to be considered notable then there is no justification whatsoever for keeping this article. DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 00:27, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability, very low-level team. GiantSnowman 07:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - I did not make this page but I do help make edits on it. I do understand that to many people we would appear to be a non-notable local football club and I would agree that most points raised so far are valid, however I wish for you to at least consider our case. I would estimate that probably under 200 people have read this page. I would also estimate that there are many other pages on Wikipedia that have been read by less people. The information on this page and the links to Valley FC seasons is all honest and accurate. To many it means nothing but to people who are familiar with the Wellington football scene it may be relevant and interesting. As our history to date is recorded only on Wikipedia and a lot of time was taken making and updating the article, I would ask that we are given a chance to provide more sources to verify the validity of the article. If the page is to be taken down regardless of a lack of sources, I would ask for at least a few days for the users who made the page to transfer the history off it. It would be a great shame to some if the information was lost. I would also add that surely the amount of server space this article takes up would be out weighed by the usefulness of the article. Please let us keep our historical records. Tumlin (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment to qualify for an article the club must meet Wiki's notability guidelines and those for sports. Take read of what Wiki is not as well. Hopefully these will help inform you. Sorry, but I can't find anything that would bring the article over these threshholds. NealeFamily (talk) 01:44, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Thanks for the help NealeFamily. Wiki is not would suggest this page fits with what Wikipedia was designed to be. It seems the greatest argument for deletion of this page would be the notability requirements. After reading those requirements various times it would appear that the only real reason that this page is not ok is due to a lack of sources. The reason why sources are important is to ensure that information given is not false. Therefore the main argument for deleting this page is not that the club is small but that the information on the page may not be correct. To argue that the page does not require more sources would be ridiculous, however does the information on this page appear false? Having read both the section on why the requirements exist and the Valley FC page in depth, I believe that if more sources were to be added there would be little reason why this page should not stay up. Tumlin (talk) 00:45, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete No indication of notability. No references in article about club. Nfitz (talk) 18:38, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable club. Keep !voter above doesn't advance any policy-based reasons to keep -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:08, 19 April 2015 (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.