Talk:Adelaide University Football Club
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page has been spun off the Sport at the University of Adelaide page. It seems incomplete and may have been lifted directly from the club's own web page. It requires major editing. Ozdaren 13:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Do not delete
The AUFC is the most notable amateur football club in South Australia. It has a national reputation and is quite old. Although the article does not meet WP standards for format etc it should remain. Just because it cannot be cross referenced on the internet does not mean it should be deleted. The internet is not the repository of all the information in the world. KEEP. Ozdaren 23:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Verifiability
Please read the verifiability page. It says, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source." So please provide reliable sources for the information in the article or I will delete it. The source does not have to be on the internet. Books, newspapers and encyclopedias can be reliable sources. Username nought 02:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- The article has a number of references and sources that are verefiable and unique. Your addition of a "Unreferenced|date=June 2007"tag is part of campaign to delete articles relating to student culture. I have removed your tag. You will better need to prove intentions. Ozdaren 12:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Notability
I don't think this subject is notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Please read the Wikipedia guideline on notability, it says, "Within Wikipedia, Notability is an article inclusion criterion based on encyclopedic suitability" and "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." If sources like this can't be found I suggest this article gets merged with another article. If sources aren't found within 2 weeks I will start the deletion process. Username nought 12:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Read the article. Your tagging is incorrect and represents a POV on your behalf. I have now removed the tag. If you want to improve the article feel free to find more sources. Ozdaren 13:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please don't remove the tag for notability unless reliable sources that are independent of the subject and that have significant coverage of the subject are added to the references section. The article currently does not cite any sources like this. If the tag is removed again without the required sources added to the reference section I will consider it an act of vandalism. Username nought 13:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- That's ridiculous. The source cited in the article lead gives a detailed description of the inclusion of the AUFC into the SAAFL (itself a notable body), along with the positive effect its inclusion had on competition in South Australia. Did you even read the article? You are the vandal, mate.--Yeti Hunter 13:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Nought, you obviously do not grasp the intention of the reliable sources guidelines. There is no logical way that a reliable source can be independant of the subject. How could a reliable article that claims to have significant coverage of the subject possibly be independant of the subject. Now you are just not making any sense. Please clarify your comments with some original prose, not just quotes or paraphrasing of wiki guidelines. ABVS1936 14:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- That's ridiculous. The source cited in the article lead gives a detailed description of the inclusion of the AUFC into the SAAFL (itself a notable body), along with the positive effect its inclusion had on competition in South Australia. Did you even read the article? You are the vandal, mate.--Yeti Hunter 13:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Please don't remove the tag for notability unless reliable sources that are independent of the subject and that have significant coverage of the subject are added to the references section. The article currently does not cite any sources like this. If the tag is removed again without the required sources added to the reference section I will consider it an act of vandalism. Username nought 13:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
