Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Worcester Royals

I cannot believe you have nominated our article for deletion. As you may know I have worked hard on establishing this as an informational page while we get our own website up and running. I have looked over full NFL teams profiles and NCAA collage teams profiles as well as other teams from within the UK to try and follow a set design for the sport of American Football. Yes the sport doesn't have the media coverage or the participation levels of that in America but it is people like myself and others who are trying to raise the image of the sport around the country. The deletion of this account would hinder this goal and if this article is deleted then are you going to nominate all the teams who participate in the BUAFL and the BAFL? In my opinion you should either delete non or all. (Stuart699 (talk) 11:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC))
 * Hi Stuart, Please don't take the prodding of this article as a personal insult. I believe that several other university AF teams have been prodded and ultimately deleted as well, so yours isn't the only page. Also often it is difficult to nominate a class of articles, such as all GB uni AF teams, because there might be one or two that are notable and then the whole discussion has to be closed and individual ones started up. I believe eventually all the BUAFL pages will be nominated, but also believe that the individual consideration of each one, given that clearly substantial effort has gone into the creation of the articles is warranted.
 * The main question here is notability. There is, as far as I am aware, no set notability guidelines for university teams, but the fact is that none of the teams prodded so far have made any real impact in wider scheme of things and do seem to fail WP:GNG. This is a shame, because the pages that have been created are of a pretty decent standard and certainly a lot better than some articles for other more notable sports teams.
 * You should also be aware, however, that WP is not a myspace type page and it is not really appropriate to create informaitonal pages effectively as a placeholder until your own website is up and running.
 * Furthermore, you should be aware that pages that are deleted are not lost for ever and a deletion does not mean a page can never be created. If the team were to be deemed non-notable and deleted, but then to become notable, the page can be resurrected, you would not have to recreate the article.
 * Finally, the AfDs are not votes, we are trying to establish consensus, please put across your own reasons why the team is notable, preferrably citing at least WP:GNG or other relevant notability guidelines. If an admin deems that consensus is that the team is notable the article will be kept. However, please refrain from getting loads of other editors to join in the discussion who create accounts simply to join in the discussion. Whilst this is perfectly acceptable, such comments can often be counter-productive as they can turn the debate into more of a slanging match. Fenix down (talk) 12:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I didnt have chance to record everything that was on the page to a word document. I seem to remember someone saying the article was just moved to an archive folder, doesn anyone know of the where abouts of this archive folder and could the post the link up on here or message me with it please. Many Thanks, Stuart699 (talk) 15:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)