Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birżebbuġa St. Peter's F.C.

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) Kieran207(talk-Contribs) 00:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Birżebbuġa St. Peter's F.C.

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable amateur club, fails WP:FOOTYN. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article's too poorly sourced, but it's a former first division Maltese club that's sourceable: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Not all of those are great sources, but the Maltese league gets decent local coverage, and if I saw this red-linked, I would try to create the article. SportingFlyer T·C 23:43, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 10:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SportingFlyer's research which shows notability. Giant Snowman 10:56, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete - Passes WP:FOOTYN, because of the clause here: "Teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) generally meet WP:GNG criteria. Teams that are not eligible for national cups must be shown to meet broader WP:N criteria." as shown here: "https://int.soccerway.com/national/malta/fa-trophy/20192020/2nd-round/r53593/", in the

12th line. Also passes WP:GNG as they have significant coverage from the Maltese Football Association, which is reliable and official and a FIFA member, thus being naturally independant. apple20674 apple20674 Talk 12:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep': As per Sportingflyers findings. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 16:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malta-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:56, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SportingFlyer, also is the nominator doing a WP:BEFORE at all? Govvy (talk) 11:23, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets FOOTYN and gets just about enough coverage for the article to be justified anyway Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - By the sources found from SportingFlyer, I think this is might be a clear keep here. HawkAussie (talk) 06:39, 9 April 2021 (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.