Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S.L. Benfica (women's football)

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 speedy keep. Clearly notable from sources provided. Guideline noted by nominator does not cover clubs. Fenix down (talk) 08:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

S.L. Benfica (women's football)[edit]

[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)

Fails WP:NFOOTBALL. SLBedit (talk) 15:15, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep- meets WP:GNG with presented sources in the article including that from BBC. Vague nomination. WP:NFOOTBALL is for athletes not teams or clubs. See WP:NTEAM. Hitro talk 16:14, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The league where they play isn't professional. SLBedit (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although the majority of top women's leagues and players around the world are not included currently under WikiProject Football's frequently debated notability guideline: WP:NFOOTBALL, often times there is enough media coverage about a player, team, or league that meets the WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT guidelines, which take precedence over WP:NFOOTBALL. Anyhow, it's an article about a club, WP:GNG is what to be considered. Hitro talk 16:32, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep It appears nominator is confused. WP:FPL and WP:NFOOTBALL apply to players, not teams. Amateur soccer teams can be, and frequently are, notable. I don't see any reason why this should be deleted. Smartyllama (talk) 17:06, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 18:41, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A professional football team with many other available sources not in the article, an absolutely clear keep. SportingFlyer talk 20:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SportingFlyer: Can you provide a source saying it is a professional football team? SLBedit (talk) 21:06, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SLBedit: [1] but it has absolutely no bearing on the notability of the article. SportingFlyer talk 21:16, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had already read that source. "Assente numa gestão profissional" ("Based on a professional management") doesn't mean it's a professional team. Benfica have other amateur teams with a professional management. I didn't say it was relevant to the article's notability. SLBedit (talk) 11:01, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (I started the article) - Like others I'm surprised at this nomination. In part it could be due to me not adding enough sources to the article when I created it - so sorry about that. But the team has played in the national cup if that still has any currency in these votes (I find it hard to keep up)? They won 20–0 and 16–0 in the first two rounds and were due to play in Madeira today but their flight was cancelled. When they won a pre-season tournament in Spain it received national media coverage.[2] In this tournament they beat Atlético Madrid, the champions of Spain who had knocked FullyProfessional™ Man City out of this season's UEFA Women's Champions League! I think this gives an indication of the Benfica team's level/standing. I think you could make an analogy with Manchester United W.F.C. who started off this season at the semi-pro second level but are generally steamrolling their opposition. The Benfica team's first league game resulted in a new national record win (28–0), garnering coverage in national and international media.[3], [4] As for professionalism, it seems improbable that all those Brazil national team players are there purely out of goodwill. They probably aren't being paid as much as they deserve (imo) but clearly this is no amateur team. As a football fan myself I accept there's often a level of revulsion towards 'franchise football' and these sort of artificial 'newco' teams, but Wikipedia is not the place for us to right great wrongs. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 10:56, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the article for deletion because it's about a team not playing in a professional league, but I was wrong: that rule only applies to players and managers. SLBedit (talk) 11:03, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - NFOOTY doesn't relate to football clubs, as others have said Spiderone 11:25, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep As pointed out, a club can't fail WP:NFOOTBALL and this club has received international coverage. Number 5 7 12:36, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a major sport club in Portugal. There was widely coverage in Portugal about its foundation and everything. If you people want I can provide links in Portuguese, despite no knowing if you people actually speak Portuguese.--SirEdimon (talk) 01:23, 24 December 2018 (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.