Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premier League 2008-09

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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The result was nomination withdrawn, but a pretty solid keep (disclaimer: I took part in the discussion, but as the nominator indicated they wish to withdraw the deletion request, hopefully there's no problem with me closing this debate). Canley (talk) 06:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Premier League 2008-09

[edit]
Premier League 2008-09 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

It seems a bit absurd to create an article about a league's future season while the current season has yet to end. I understand it will very likely be recreated, but it's not currently necessary. Some of the article seems to violate WP:CRYSTAL. crassic![talk] 00:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. I'm pretty sure this won't be notable until the season starts, and it's currently crystal-balling. No prejudice against recreation. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 00:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (speedy) meets WP:Crystal easily. What next, nominate United States presidential election, 2008, 2008 Summer Olympics? ChessCreator (talk) 02:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I actually wrote a substantial paragraph on my reasons why, but decided not to post it here since it would clutter up the debate. I have, however, made a user subpage here to store it where it won't get in the way, and I urge those who are voting for deletion to read it, as well as anyone else who is interested. Falastur2 (talk) 02:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Some of the article violates WP:CRYSTAL? Well, here's a barmy notion: remove those bits from the article instead of deleting it. I'm sure there's enough confirmed, verifiable content to sustain an article on the next Premier League season. --Canley (talk) 02:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't think this article violates WP:CRYSTAL, since my 3 lists give indications of whether a team is certain to compete in next season's premier league, or if there is a possibility of a team qualifying for the premier league. Notice that there are is no non-factual information in the article. A team's certainty of finishing top 7 in the premier league this season is a fact, not just a prediction. Likewise, notice that the other lists of possibilities, contain no predictions of who will or won't be relegated from the premiership/promoted from the championship, just a list of possibilities, all of which are entirely factual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Funkyduncan (talk • contribs) 12:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. Canley (talk) 02:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I'm glad to see the soccer fans out, but this is a violation of coatrack. When the season is a full entity -- past tense -- it can be discussed as a whole. Wikipedia is not a scoreboard, a news ticker, or a fan site. Consult your local paper for when games are on tele near you -- not Wikipedia. Utgard Loki (talk) 14:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - So you've changed your argument now that coatrack was shown to be incorrect. Fair enough. Now what do you find in WP:CRYSTAL. Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.
So are you saying the event is not notable? Or that it's not almost certain to take place? ChessCreator (talk) 20:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My original WP:CRYSTAL concerns were removed by User:Wrightyboy. But to create an article about a future season while the current season is still well in progress is a bit crazy, imo. crassic![talk] 21:52, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Ironic you should mention 2009 in literature, Utgard Loki. It amused me to note that the article 2008 in literature was created in April 2007 - virtually twelve months from this date. I can honestly say that I expect to see 2009 in literature formed within two months of this date. And I remind you, as I pointed out in my reasons for keeping this article, the season ahead (and I mean in general, not just the 08-09 season) is hugely important to European football and its fans. I would hardly believe it crazy to create this article so early, for the same reason that I believe the creation of 2008 in literature in 2007 quite logical and reasonable. Falastur2 (talk) 04:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
May I withdraw? crassic![talk] 03:46, 7 April 2008 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Premier_League_2008-09&oldid=1149992090"