Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sam4731/North London County

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Sam4731/North London County
Relisted. Salvio Let's talk about it! 00:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)



Article on an amateur/social football (soccer) team which is completely non-notable if it even exists at all. Speedy was declined in favour of userfying, since when no improvement of the article has taken place. Frankly, the subject is so non-notable that it could not be made suitable for mainspace even if the creator were to return....... ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:18, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The team still does exist so we should be allowed to have a page, why not we have rights. We have improved the page and it looks like a proper Wikipedia page so I don't see the problem.

User:Sam4731 12:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the requirement for having a WP article is not merely existing, subjects must be notable - see WP:N -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio  Let's talk about it! 00:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment This is not stale and the user is apparently working on it. Shouldn't we give him the benefit of the doubt in eventually claiming notability and moving to article space? -- Klein zach  01:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * OK then, but if this team of guys who play amateur football on Sundays down at their local leisure centre manages to pass WP:N I will literally eat my sofa -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:41, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * We're not really that concered with having a proper Article space, we're happy to just have a user page that no-one apart from us will really see anyway, I fail to see the problem -- User:Sam4731 13:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:NOTWEBHOST -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Our page is however not a personal page, I think it is an informative topic that some people may be interested in, your opinion may be otherwise, but you can't have a wrong opinion. Therefore our page should be left alone. -- User:Sam4731 15:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Sorry but if there is no intention to make this into an article then WP:NOTWEBHOST does apply. -- Klein zach  23:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per 's and 's notes about WP:NOTWEBHOST. Delete also per WP:FAKEARTICLE states: "Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion.. Because this page violates WP:FAKEARTICLE and WP:NOTWEBHOST, it should be deleted. Cunard (talk) 08:31, 16 January 2012 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.