Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teams Sponsored By Umbro
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 of the debate was delete RasputinAXP c 03:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Totally unnecessary list. Violates policy. EdGl 20:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC) Edit Voters, please see here and here for similar AfDs. EdGl 01:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support vote by User:King konger because:
- Support I do not agree with this deletion as this page provides details on teams sponsored by umbro. I piece of informtion lacking on the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by King konger (talk • contribs)
- Do not delete as this is an encylopedic list. Also usful in fining football teams.— Preceding unsigned comment added by King konger (talk • contribs)
- Support there is no need to delete this page as it a very resourceful page and does no harm to anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by King konger (talk • contribs)
- Addidas has the same list so why hasn't that been deleted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by King konger (talk • contribs)
- Good; I'll put that one up for deletion too. (King konger, please sign your posts) -EdGl 01:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support this is not for umbro promotion it simply lists what cannot fit on the original umbro page. King Konger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.74 (talk • contribs) (note to admin: this vote was signed "King Konger", who already voted)
- Delete per nom. DVD+ R/W 01:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Support This page provides a database of information that is tried to be shown in the main umbro article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.74 (talk • contribs)
- Delete per nom. I've also grouped King konger's multiple votes together under one bullet point to make things neater. -- Hirudo 15:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - its sole purpose is promotion for Umbro. Listcruft. B.Wind 17:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. – Elisson • Talk 22:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unencyclopedic listcruft. lowercase 18:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As per my reading it doesn't violate policy. Is a very useful list in the correct circumstances. aLii 23:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not mean it is suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia." (from WP:NOT). Violates policy to me. -EdGl 22:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Pretty much every article on wikipedia could be argued to breach that, if you were so inclined. The policy is very specific about what kind of lists shouldn't be allowed:
- Comment. "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not mean it is suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia." (from WP:NOT). Violates policy to me. -EdGl 22:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Lists of Frequently Asked Questions. Wikipedia articles should not list FAQs. Instead, format the information provided as neutral prose within the appropriate article(s). You may want to consider contributing FAQ lists to Wikibooks.
- Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as quotations, aphorisms, or persons. If you want to enter lists of quotations, put them into our sister project Wikiquote. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic. Wikipedia also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference.
- The specifics in this section of policy you're talking about are merely instances where the community has already made a consensus. There is no consensus yet for the issue right here in this afd, which we are trying to make right now! :-) The argument I'm trying to make wouldn't work on "pretty much every article on wikipedia", but it sure is working on this one... EdGl 20:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is not just another list, it is definitive and informative. It answers the question "Which teams, clubs, countries are sponsored by Umbro?" I question whether it is notable but I have seen many lists that beggar the same question which are kept. -- Alias Flood 01:44, 1 June 2006 (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.