Talk:Green Archers United F.C.

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Football Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Well, it pays to check the page history now and again.[edit]

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 February 2011. The result of the discussion was keep.

Hang on (AfD)[edit]

This is yet another case if an article isn't about something European or North American, it can't be notable. If it's notable in the Philippines, then it's notable in that part of the world.

A check of Pacific football leagues show both mention of and links to this team.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 10:06, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another case of something not being European or North American? How? That's absurd. And what Pacific football leagues? I don't see any other article linking to this. Banana Fingers (talk) 12:52, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting: there were 3 yesterday, 2 of them edited by you adding delete tags:

Japan K-Line
2011 LBC United Football League
Green Archers Orient Freight

It's also mentioned in the Wiki Projects Football.

Please be kinder to new and non-native English speakers creating articles.

Thank you. --UnicornTapestry (talk) 19:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me where on WP:Footy these clubs and that league have been mentioned. You believe those are notable as well? And Reverted as "vandalism"?? And who is this "new and non-native English speaker" that I was supposedly being mean to? Give me a break! Banana Fingers (talk)

Your accusation of racism, by itself, is not a reason to keep this article. It should be kept if this team plays at the highest level of its sport, and has been written about in reliable, independent sources. As you suspect, I don't know much about Filipino football, and this article doesn't tell me enough to know whether this article meets the guidelines. Does it? Can you add links to the necessary sources that would verify this team's notability? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:58, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here, here. As the old ad used to say, "where's the beef?" Where's the meat of the article that would make it as joyful to read as a quarter pounder with cheese is to eat? Having said that, I would say that the energy spent on bluster would be better spent on improvement. I would urge the creator of the article to bend his will to the improvement article. If not, I may circle back and WP:PROD it myself. Dloh cierekim 14:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedy[edit]

I'm of the opinion that an effort for improvement should be made before tagging for CSD. Unless the editor desiring deletion has particular knowledge of the subject that it is not notable, such effort should be made. If the editor seeking deletion has such knowledge, it would be helpful for them to note it on the article talk page, so that others may understand. There is an abundance of G-hits that may or may not contain the requisite coverage and information by which to determine notability. It would be best to PROD or AFD this article after dealing with these potential sources and noting the outcome here and in the nomination. Dloh cierekim 14:06, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2012/13 kit[edit]

Please update to 2012/13 kit. --Bernejay (talk) 06:22, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]