Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arsenal season review 2005-06

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. - Mailer Diablo 13:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arsenal season review 2005-06

Also see:

• Aston Villa season review 2005-06
• Birmingham City season review 2005-06
• Blackburn Rovers season review 2005-06
• Bolton Wanderers season review 2005-06
• Charlton Athletic season review 2005-06
• Chelsea season review 2005-06
• Everton season review 2005-06
• Fulham season review 2005-06
• Liverpool season review 2005-06
• Manchester City season review 2005-06
• Manchester United season review 2005-06
• Middlesbrough season review 2005-06
• Newcastle United season review 2005-06
• Portsmouth season review 2005-06
• Sunderland season review 2005-06
• Tottenham Hotspur season review 2005-06
• West Bromwich Albion season review 2005-06
• West Ham United season review 2005-06
• Wigan Athletic season review 2005-06
• Manchester United season review 2004-05
• Everton season review 2004-05
• Liverpool season review 2004-05
• Bolton Wanderers season review 2004-05
• Middlesbrough season review 2004-05
• Manchester City season review 2004-05
• Tottenham Hotspur season review 2004-05
• Aston Villa season review 2004-05
• Charlton Athletic season review
• Birmingham City season review 2004-05
• Fulham season review 2004-05
• Newcastle United season review 2004-05
• Blackburn Rovers season review 2004-05
• Portsmouth season review 2004-05
• West Bromwich Albion season review 2004-05
• Crystal Palace season review 2004-05
• Norwich City season review 2004-05
• Southampton season review 2004-05

I'm going to nominate this group of articles since I think we'd first need consensus before going ahead and creating such articles. Personally I feel that most info here that can be salvaged should go into the history section of the club, or a seperate history article if one exists. Only when the history article gets extremely long should we contemplate splitting of articles like this. jaco♫plane 15:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Merge into History of Arsenal F.C. with similar action for the rest. BlueValour 16:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
  • History of Arsenal F.C. already contains the relevant information as do other clubs' pages, usually written much better than the above. The quality of these season articles is so low I don't see why we should expend all the work needed into merging them into the main ones. Qwghlm 16:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Probably merge, but I have a suspicion that these could all be copied from somewhere like a football magazine or newspaper supllement. Emeraude 16:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Convinced by others that merging is inappropriate. Delete Emeraude 16:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - they contain little more content than is in club's history pages already, and most of them are just POV garbling. HornetMike 16:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, no merge. – Elisson • T • C • 16:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all - quite apart from the fact these articles are all badly written and full of POV (which precludes a merge), we already have historical accounts of individual seasons and individual club histories. To combine both schemes of division only duplicates that effort and creates lots of unmanageable stubs. Qwghlm 16:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - a merge doesn't mean adding all the material to the destination article. It means adding the encyclopaedic material that is missing and discarding duplicates, POV etc. The POV in the articles doesn't preclude a merge since it should be cut out as a normal editing procedure. BlueValour 16:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• I know what the procedure for a merge is - my point is that there's so little in these articles that is salvageable and NPOV that has not already been covered in other club history articles that it is not worth the effort to go through them. Virtually every football club article covers recent events in very great detail already. Qwghlm 16:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Merge those that can be merged, like Arsenal and Man U, Delete the rest. (Quentin X 16:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC))
• Merge anything that can be salvaged, though most is journalistic waffle. This author is "prolific" but tends to be uncommunicative. Regrettably more dross is produced than good articles and much time is wasted on AfD, trying to communicate etc etc. Please can someone, anyone, help him become an excellent editor? Fiddle Faddle 16:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - nothing to add WikiGull 17:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Should be in the existing articles. QuiteUnusual 17:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete all and indef block for creator as serial vandal. L0b0t 17:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete for the reasons already stated. I'm not opposed to the idea of season-by-season details for clubs, but these articles don't contain anything useful. Gasheadsteve 18:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all per Qwghlm. Oldelpaso 19:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all. Highly POV and read like fan columns. -- Necrothesp 02:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and consider the creation of a Wikisports project to go along with Wikinews. Haikupoet 07:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge: into existing articles (these don't need to be separate season-by-season reviews). Possibly merge all pages refering to a single club together and link to main club page ie. so you get an "Arsenal Season-by-season performance" page. -- MLD · T · C · @:  15:16, 3 November 2006 (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.