Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hull City A.F.C. Reserves

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 both. Sr13 08:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hull City A.F.C. Reserves

Hull City A.F.C. Reserves (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I am also nominating:

• Hull City A.F.C. Juniors

Other than a few very minor details, these pages contain no more content than there is already on the main Hull City A.F.C. page - so no need for a merge. Not only are they are redundant, but they have no room for expansion - Hull City aren't a big enough club to require fringe players listing in the reserve page - unlike with, for example, Arsenal F.C. Reserves. And youth players are automatically non-notable, so there is no need to list them in the youth article. HornetMike 16:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

• This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions.

• Delete Duplication of information means two pages to maintain instead of just one. Beve 17:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Pretty needless. Mattythewhite 17:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete doesn't warrant more than a section in the main club article. Number 57 20:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as above comments, too much information that could easily be covered on the main Hull City FC article. ♦Tangerines BFC ♦·Talk 21:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Punkmorten 07:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment just because various individuals are not notable enough to require an article of their own does not necessarily mean that they shouldn't be mentioned in the article - they just don't need a wikilink to a seperate article. Robotforaday 17:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, just noticed Hull City A.F.C. staff. Once again, this article contains nothing that isn't in the main article anyway. Little room for expansion either, most of the backroom staff are non-notable and therefore there's little point in listing them. And we've recently deleted a couple of seperate squad articles. So, if it's OK with everyone I'll add it to the nomination. HornetMike 11:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete too as per nom. Number 57 13:06, 5 July 2007 (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.