Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selangor F.C. III & IV

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 redirect to Selangor F.C.. If there is content worth Merging, an editor can find it on the Redirected page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Selangor F.C. III & IV

[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 youth club division Avilich (talk) 21:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Malaysia. Avilich (talk) 21:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 21:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Selangor F.C.#Reserve teams as a valid WP:ATD. Not notable enough for a separate article. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's only mentioned there because there is an article, but if this isn't kept this won't be the case anymore, so it should not be redirected there. Avilich (talk) 03:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They should be mentioned in passing there anyway, even if it's just one sentence saying there are youth teams, and listing names and age groups. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:12, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - Add it to the main Selangor FC page. I don't think it would be a problem and you wouldn't lose any info.I don't know if there will ever be a lot of info since they are 3rd and 4th teams.KatoKungLee (talk) 17:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fails per GiantSnowman. The article has unsourced info about LPs so it should be deleted and then if there is a consensus redirected. // Timothy :: talk 15:29, 20 March 2023 (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.