Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melbourne Revolution FC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Daniel.Bryant 09:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Melbourne Revolution FC

Melbourne Revolution FC (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable minor football team. Articles linking from this page about players etc. should be deleted also. Archibald99  23:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}
  • This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. Archibald99  00:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Scottmsg 02:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Social indoor soccer team in the Box Hill Indoor Soccer League in Melbourne. No claim to notability. Player articles should be deleted as well. May be case under A7 non-notable organisation. Capitalistroadster 03:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 03:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, in addition to being non-notable, it looks like most of the edits are by their "manager", Jonathan Menner. Lankiveil 04:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
  • Delete -- nn. - Longhair\talk 05:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEPhello lads, this page shouldnt be deleted because it is set up so people can further learn more about us and who play for us i really dont see the need to delete it, you should maybe spend some time making your own or something before you see the need to go and ask someone elses to be deleted, is it hurting anyone? do you also want me to delete our myspace because were not important enough? all the stats are right all the facts are right, who really cares 19:02, 11 February 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.48.211 (talk • contribs)
Comment The above purposes would be much better met by a webpage published by yourself rather than a page on an encyclopaedia. Orderinchaos78 08:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP The page is up to and it is providing correct details for anyone who needs to know about indoor football —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.239.223.209 (talk) 12:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
  • KEEP I dont feel it is necessary to delete this page as it is providing facts not fiction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.14.160 (talk • contribs) — 203.214.14.160 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete Unless the anons here can show otherwise, this is an article about a non-notable sports team. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 08:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP i really dont see what the problem is with this :S —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.107.48.211 (talk) 08:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
  • Delete not notable.--cj | talk 10:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • DElete - division 3 indoor team says it all. - Peripitus (Talk) 10:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless some notability can be established. A less than year old mates team doesn't cut it. Nuttah68 10:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Division 3 indoor soccer team? Not notable enough. --Canley 11:43, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not even close to being notable enough for inclusion. Ignore the votes to 'keep' from sockpuppets of the page's creator. --Stevefarrell 12:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP This club although small has had hundreds of adds from people all over the world on its myspace it is followed in england and scotland by a keen few fans, this wikipedia is so that these fans can look into further statistics and further analysis of the club , all stats and facts are 100% true, i see no reason to delete this page —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnnybhoy22 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
  • Speedy delete Recreational team. Already had a db-template, but it was removed by the article starter. Julius Sahara 16:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --Edcolins 17:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination and WP:CORP. Qwghlm 20:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep you people need to get out more, and actually the speedy delete was not deleted by the page creator smart ass, the page was taken off the speedy delete list —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnnybhoy22 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC).
  • KEEP the fact that this page is of importance both interstate and internationally gives it suitable grounds for being kept on, the idea of the site is to provide pages relevant to what people want and are interested in, and obviously this fits that criteria —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.164.134.249 (talk • contribs) — 58.164.134.249 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete as a non-notable team (along with the linked player articles). The various keep !voters offer no significant argument other than "this is true" and "I find it useful", which are not valid reasons to keep an article ChrisTheDude 08:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - if individual players make it to a higher league, they could well become notable enough to have an article. This fails on the same grounds as local councillors not being notable enough to have articles (despite their state parliamentary counterparts having them). Orderinchaos78 08:42, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • The club has fans internationaly it maybe a small supporter base but atleast we have one we have fans in other states in australia aswell, doesnt this mean that we are not some social club? which we are not —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnybhoy22 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete. That's nice, a myspace page for a reference. YechielMan 23:14, 12 February 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.