Talk:Jeanfield Swifts F.C.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 6 March 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Why have the squad and non playing staff on wikipedia?

There is no reason for the players and staff to be on this site. These people are not notable whatsoever. I would understand if you wanted to list ex professionals or the likes but these are just 'normal' people playing for an amateur team in a junior league. —Preceding unsigned comment added by El Severe (talk • contribs)

I can tell you've looked at football articles a lot. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Meaning? How can we get a mod to make a call on this then? I don't think the players and committee need to be on the wikipedia site. They are nobodys. (199.43.14.101 16:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

Players are nobodys. Yes, yes, I see your point there...

Plucking a club from my mind, have a look at, oh, Hull City's article. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hull City are an English League team aren't they, hence the notability?

I mean, could I put any amateur team on there and put their player list on? I don't think so.

Jeanfield Swifts probably shouldn't even be on wikipedia, neither should any junior teams but having a player list etc.....bit of a joke. I guess you are affiliated with them, so your judgement is clouded?

How can we get the mods to make a call on this?(El Severe 16:49, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

We've already determined Swifts are a notable club, hence we can include their squad. Your motion to delete the article was unsuccessful, so feel free to continue with constructive editing elsewhere on Wikipedia. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Well now I motion we delete the squad and non playing staff, completely not notable at all.

So, how can I get a call made on whether or not the squad should be allowed? (El Severe 16:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

Strange as it may seem, I tend to agree with El Severe to some extent on this one. I don't find list of playing staffs at lower levels (which are likely to be full of non-linked names, and more transient than those at professional sides) add anything to articles. Of course, I disagree with him/her about the existence of the article itself, see the AfD. - fchd 16:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I now agree that the article should be kept, seeing all other junior clubs are represented.

BUT, can you provide evidence of notability or evidence that these players even play for Jeanfield?

That is why I motion to remove the players and commitee list.(El Severe 16:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

I'll agree to the (non-)playing staff removal. The article's survival was the main thing. El Severe (aka 199.43.14.101) hasn't explained why he classes the club's badge as non-notable. - Dudesleeper · Talk 16:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy for club badge to remain. Apologies for moving between user name and IP address, PC acting strange (El Severe 17:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

I note from all the comments above that Dudesleeper seems to take ownership of this article and it seems any changes must be vetted through him first. I have to tell Dudesleeper there is wikipedia policy on this [[1]]- just because you created an article, and laods of other as far as Im concerned un-notable Scottish football club stubs does not mean to say you have final say on things that are changed on this article.

What got up my nose is the fact when a user askde for a moderator to give a content dispute decision you in effect vetoed him until someone else made a comment and of which you then decided to back down, but had it not been for fchd comment you wouldnt have let the removal of the non playing staff go ahead. --PrincessBrat 10:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I can't see anywhere in the discussion above where Dudesleeper claims to "own" the article - am I missing something.....? ChrisTheDude 07:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

If you read the article you will see what I mean. I quote I'll agree to the (non-)playing staff removal. Sounds like ownership to me, and also instead of letting the article grow by itself, it seems its all subject to Dudesleeper opinion wether it happens or not --PrincessBrat 21:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jeanfield Swifts badge.jpg

Image:Jeanfield Swifts badge.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)