Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marystown United

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. Fenix down (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marystown United[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:GNG. KKKNL1488 (talk) 01:57, 24 August 2019‎ (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:24, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No sources found aside from the three trivial ones already cited (and very similar ones), not even stats seem to be online. No evidence of notability. ComplexRational (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just so we know, the nominator has been banned for sockpupperty. HawkAussie (talk) 22:48, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 11:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I'm seeing over 300 articles in the Canadian newspaper archive, mostly in the first decade of the 2000s. Including national coverage, when the senior mens team played in the 2004 Canadian National Challenge Cup. Easily meets GNG. Nfitz (talk) 02:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've improved the article by adding a couple of these sources. Nfitz (talk) 14:34, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nfitz: As these sources are not publicly available, and seem to imply a very different picture than the delete !votes, I must ask: do these 300+ articles have substantiative, significant coverage? Or are there only trivial mentions similar to those few I found that do not demonstrate notability? If any of these articles are available without paywalls, could you please provide links? ComplexRational (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most appear to be game reports. And most are from St. Johns or Corner Brook (which is certainly not local!) newspapers. But a few seem more detailed, like the first (but not second) one I referenced. Sadly, the full articles aren't available, only abstracts, even with a subscription. Somebody would have to go through microfilm. There's certainly more than 3 trivial sources though. Article needs improving. Is the team still active - the coverage seems to die over a decade ago? Nfitz (talk) 01:27, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Added four more references. Nfitz (talk) 02:05, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These additions look good, though I still feel that there isn't much content other than their 1999 and 2004 tournament appearances, and that the sources reaffirm the same statements rather than make new ones. Notability still appears borderline at best, unless there is significant content in these sources for expansion. ComplexRational (talk) 13:53, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom. no sign of notability Alex-h (talk) 09:13, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – though there are mentions, I'm not seeing in-depth/significant coverage to meet GNG – Levivich 02:28, 31 August 2019 (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.