Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malahide United F.C.

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malahide United F.C.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. Unreferenced article about an amateur sporting club. No indication that it meets general notability guidelines. Lacks references to 3rd party sources RadioFan (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - plays at level 4 in the Irish pyramid which emerging consensus indicates as the threshold for notability. The way forward is to add available sources and expand the page, not to delete. TerriersFan (talk) 18:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as TerriersFan says, level 4 of the Irish football league is notable enough. Giant Snowman 18:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - if this is a notable level to be playing at, there should be 3rd party references where the team is the subject of the coverage, could you add some?--RadioFan (talk) 19:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Google News provides quite a few hits which I believe would pass WP:GNG (including their near cup giant-killing of Sligo), and their appearances in the FAI Cup would be enough to pass the general rule of thumb for football club notability. Bettia (talk) 09:05, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment While Google hits can indicate how well known a subject is, it's no guarantee of meeting notability guidelines. Amateur teams can meet notability guidelines with demonstration of sufficient coverage, but this isnt there. There are no claims of notability in the article nor any references at all. --RadioFan (talk) 10:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Level 4 team. BigDunc 20:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, appearance in the later stages of the FAI Cup pass notability in my opinion.--Vintagekits (talk) 10:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 16:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. Govvy (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.