Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of incidents involving VFL/AFL players

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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of incidents involving VFL/AFL players[edit]

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

The arguments presented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of off-field incidents involving rugby league players apply to this article also. This list is mostly concerning off-field incidents, and is almost entirely negative. As such, it is unencyclopedic and unnecessary. Of course, some incidents (like the St Kilda schoolgirl scandal) may be notable - these can have their own articles. St Anselm (talk) 06:04, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Full disclosure: Prior to the rugby league discussion, I was involved in a dispute with an anonymous editor concerning my efforts to prune the article. I now believe the whole article should go. St Anselm (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —St Anselm (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a disparate list of incidents that hits the news cycle with no guidance of what should be in or not. notable incidents should be included in that player's own article. LibStar (talk) 06:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's tabloid trash. The kind of news that leads to jokes about newspapers being most useful for wrapping fish and chips. HiLo48 (talk) 09:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Jenks24 (talk) 06:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, more or less the same rationale as on the other article - just gossip and tabloid rubbish. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Somewhat more constructive Delete than my earlier one - This article has high maintenance demands, with almost every addition requiring editing attention to reduce copyright violations and sensational tabloid language caused by material being copied straight from the Herald Sun and the like. HiLo48 (talk) 03:40, 28 May 2011 (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.