- Tynwald_Hill_International_Football_Tournament (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (article|XfD|restore)
First of all I discussed the deletion with the administrator who deleted it. In the end we agreed to put that into the DRV. The article was deleted for the reason "non-notable tournament for non-notable teams". Both accusations I think are wrong. The tournament has been the biggest non-FIFA football tournament in 2013 and had 6 teams, which is nearly as many as a World Cup usually has. Many of the matches have been broadcasted live by the Tamil Eelam team and the Raetia team and there where around 5 million visitors in peak. In my eyes that could be called important. Maybe more important than most non-FIFA World Cups have been. Besides that the tournament was covered by Tamil media around the globe (about 20 newspaper articles), by the Isle of Man media (radio stations and 2 pages in every newspaper). Even the Isle of Man Parliament officially invited to that tournament.
The second point is the non-notability of the teams. I would like to see any argue why they are ? I mean we are speaking about national teams of non-FIFA nations or regions or ethnics. On Wikipedia there are roughly estimated 200 articles about non-FIFA football, non-FIFA teams, non-FIFA World Cups and so on. So in fact the community seems to agree that non-FIFA football is not "non-notable". If so, the teams competing there are not non-notable, too. Tamil Eelam, Occitania and Raetia all played World Cups before. Alderney plays at the Muratti Vase each year (which is also a wiki-covered event) and Sealand is a member of the NF-Board and will most likely play at the next VIVA World Cup, too. The only team, which might be non-notable is St Johns, who are a Isle of Man first league club "only". DJLiesel (talk) 20:10, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment notability or otherwise of the teams, attendees, invitees etc. is largely irrelevant, notability is not inherited. I notice the website of the tournament nicely links the wikipedia page as the source for results which is pretty much an abuse of what wikipedia is for. I guess I could invite a few MHKs and a few Deemsters to my birthday party, will that make it notable? I can't see the Manx media (i.e. very much local) to be of much persuasion, one of my memories from 10 or so years ago was a nice 1/8 page or so in the courier with a picture showing how the sign for Foxdale had lost it's F and now read oxdale. --86.5.93.42 (talk) 20:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I do not understand your comment really. One of the 2 reasons why the article was deleted ist that the teams are non-notable. Now you say that the notability of the teams is irrelevant ? I do not see that. The Champions League is notable because of its teams, too, isn't it ? Besides it is not my fault that the homepage of the tournament is not perfect. But I think you cannot judge the notability of a tournament on a mistake on the homepage ? The official reports about the tournament have been published on a blog for non-FIFA football, but that one is not accepted as a source for wiki. Well, maybe you lost that but I do not speak just about the Manx media. There are reports in all Manx media, all Tamil media, some Occitaine media and some more. There were even journalists from Russia at this tournament. I just cannot find the kyrillic source. Of course all those sources are "local", but local sources from all over the world make the reports global again, don't they ? I mean what would you expect ? Obviously South American media does not write about it (well, in fact there are even 3 South American blogs with articles about it!), because no South American team has played there. DJLiesel (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The champions league is notable because people write about the champions league directly in detail in multiple independent reliable sources which is what our general notability guideline suggests is the notability bar for having a standalone article. See also WP:NOTINHERITED, if the champions league itself received no significant coverage, it too wouldn't be notable merely because of the participants. The point regarding the Manx media being local is it's new of interest to a very small locality, it's not of general interest, a Newspaper such as "The Times" which is a national newspaper is not local. To reiterate my example of the road sign for Foxdale, having lived on the IOM for many years, the Isle of Man is a small place with a small population, the bar for getting coverage in the local media is pretty low, hence my example of a fair amount of column space dedicated to the letter dropping off a place name on a road sign. If I remember correctly the local Sunday league football used to get a write up every week also (and the same is true all over the UK local papers write about the local leagues), they are however not of general interest and not notable from the wikipedia point of view. --86.5.93.42 (talk) 07:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment First of all thanks for your explanation. I am new to Wikipedia editing and those introductions are very welcome. I also get your "problem" beter now. What I was trying to say (I am sorry not beeing a native English speaker and might be unclear for that reason) is that the one deletion reason was the non-notability of teams, which is not true. The second one is the non-notability of the tournament itself. I have to disagree here again. First of all the Isle of Man is independent and thus IoM newspaper are national newspaper according to this definition. Besides the IoM sources there are plenty more which I mentioned a couple of times before. Somehow those keep getting ignored in this discussion. TransTamil, Tamil Guardian, UKTamilNews, LankaSriNews are all national UK or glabal papers. In addition the Canadian Tamil Youth Alliance is reporting about the tournament in Canada. The Turkish "Alamanak Spor" has an article about it. "lequebecois" from Canada also wrote about it. In addition there still are the up to 5 million live streaming viewers, the 50 Tamil language sources, hundreds of newsblogs from all over the world and much more of proofs that the tournament was noted. I mean in the end there are a couple of million people who followed the event in any way and are interested in that. On the other hand you are obviously not interested in it. But is that really a sufficient regulation to delete it that quickly ? DJLiesel (talk) 08:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The Isle of Man coverage is not national, it's all of the local news variety, if you look at the other stories at the sites you list that's pretty apparent. This is no different to any local newspaper, radio station etc. writing about local sporting events, or local garage bands or local whatever. --86.5.93.42 (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse deletion - as I stated at the original AFD, there is no evidence of any notability for this tournament. WP:ROUTINE coverage in the local rag simply does not cut it. GiantSnowman 08:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment OK. I spent most of the night with reading all the rules of Wikipedia. I cannot see why TV reports, Radio reports and news reports in about 20 countries are not an evidence of notability. Could you please shortly sum up WHY its not ? I am sure you cannot brandmark all articles I posted as WP:ROUTINE DJLiesel (talk) 08:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What TV reports? What radio reports? What international news coverage? GiantSnowman 09:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment OK, this is my last try to give evidence: TV reports: Please take a look at Manx TV and search football on their page. Then you will find all 5 TV reports about that tournament: [1]. Radio Reports: Same here. If you search Manx Radio for "Tynwald football" you will find several reports about that: [2]. International news coverage: Despite listing all those article a couple of times before, I will do it again: From France: [3]. From Isle of Man: [4], [5] plus 2 page pictured articles in all 3 Isle of Man national newspapers (I can make a picture of one of those if that helps in any way). From Tamil: [6] (UK), [7] (worldwide), [8] (Switzerland, there are more articles about the tournament on that news). Besides there are Tamil News for Australia, USA/Canada, Germany and many in Tamil language for the worldwide Tamil community. So in fact it was reported about that tournament nearly all of the world. Tamil Eelam and Raetia did also live streaming, live tickers and radio reports with background interviews during the tournament. And there was Russian media present but I cannot find the article because I do not speak Russian unfortunately. This is my last try and I will give others a chance to get into the discussions now. Maybe you could finally give an explanation why media coverage for millions of people litarally from all over the world is non-notable again ? I know neither BBC nor CNN or Al-Jazeera reported about it, but the Tamils alone are about 79 millions and all of them reading any news in their language "took note" of that tournament. DJLiesel (talk) 10:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Againt, that is nothing substantial or national, even with the 'Tamil' press covering it in passing. Lots of nationalistic papers are obviously going to cover such a nationalistic tournament, but it does not remove them from the realm of local/routine coverage I'm afraid. GiantSnowman 10:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse deletion while the AFD was fairly low turnout, it was unanimous and couldn't have been closed any other way. The event itself seems pretty minor and I share the IP's concerns that the article was apparently being used as an extension of the official website, which would be a major COI/Spam issue. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment First of all to the GiantSnowman: You are calling a nationless minority and an INTERnational tournament nationalistic ? That is so ridiculous. Callin an event which is covered in >20 countries a local one is really pointless, too. I am sorry that the Tonga national press did not report about it. You could easily delete the Superbowl for the same reason. It is just mentioned in thousands of 'local' news and of course just as a routine. But I see how wiki works now. I am just one of millions of people interested in this article and you are the admin, so just do what you want to do and keep ignoring all my references or just call them rubbish or nationalistic. I am really honestly very disappointed that wikipedia is run this way. And Dear Mr Lenahan, you are right, the deletion discussion was unanimous. But honestly, I did not even see that there was a discussion and probably there are not many non-FIFA followers active wiki editors. But I really feel that I am just loosing my time discussing here. Do whatever you think is right, because in the end wikipedia is obviously created for their editors only and not for everbody. The 'free' in 'free' encyclopedia is not that meaningful. Last thing: If you delete that I highly recommend to delete all other non-FIFA football articles and all national league articles lower than league 2. Besides you should think about deleting all national teams that are ranked below 100 in FIFA maybe ? Have fun and thanks for letting me waste 2 nights study all the rules if they are not taken into account in the end... DJLiesel (talk) 12:58, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The SuperBowl is broadbast live across the world to billions of people - as far as I'm aware the 'Tynwald Hill International Football Tournament', made up of minor and non-teams, is not. GiantSnowman 13:00, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, trying to compare this non-notable event with the Super Bowl isn't really helping your case any. Also, arguments of "If you delete this you have to delete a whole bunch of other stuff too!" are not a good idea--see WP:ALLORNOTHING. And tantrums aren't a good idea either. Anyway, this should probably be closed as withdrawn by nom. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The Super Bowl is broadcasted live, just like the Tynwald tournament was. The difference. Tynwald was broadcastet online and "just" had 5 million viewers life. The teams are not non-notable anymore, but are non-teams now? Ridiculous! I read all the rules and I know that does not help. But was does help then ? Giving references does not as all sources are labelles non-notable anyways. Arguing does not help, as you do not argue, but say: "It is non-notable." I am deeply into non-FIFA football for several years and I can tell you that this was problably the most-notable non-FIFA tournament which was not called World Cup ever. But probably you know that better than me. You have the "admin" status and so you have the power to judge what on this planet is notable and whats not. Thats the way it works, I learned that now. And about the WP:ALLORNOTHING. I know that this is "forbidden". It is still true, though. I just find it funny that the fact that 2 people do not like a topic it is banned. The article is not mine and not written for me or for you, but it is to inform the world. And I think it is quite arrogant of you to say: "I am not interested in that, so nobody is." And you do not even have a single argument for that except for beeing "non-notable", which is 100% a personal feeling. All the references proof the opposite. And I never "withdraw" from anything. The article has to stand for all the millions interested in non-notable stuff like this. I am just withdrawing from arguing with people who do not bring up a single argument. It is like talking to a wall which throws a stone on you from time to time.62.155.164.151 (talk) 16:57, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- temporarily restored for discussion at Deletion Review DGG ( talk ) 01:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse deletion - As per Giant Snowman, all references provided are essentially for local news reports, there has been no coverage at a national level of any significance that I can find. The fact that this tournament was organised and included a local Manx league team adds further weight to the argument that this was not a true "international" tournament, but simply a friendly tournament that happened to include some Non-FIFA teams. Fenix down (talk) 10:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Maybe I misunderstood one rule. How is "local news" defined in the sense of Wikipedia? Nevertheless the Isle of Man is a nation per definition and the Tamil News are neither local nor national but global for all Eelam Tamils in the world. In addition there are some local reports obviously. About the tournament: It was not organized to bring in any non-FIFA team. The IOMFA could not afford to bring a team to the Island Games on the Bermudas because of the high travelling costs. As a kind of compensation they wanted to created an international football tournament for the Manx people. This because they organized the Tynwald tournament as a side event to their national day, the Tynwald day. The reason of St John representing the Isle of Man (instead of their national team) is that the IOMFA is part of the English FA and they are thus not allowed to play any matches or tournaments outside FIFA. They just have a special permission to play the Island Games. As the tournament should take place close to the Tynwald Hill (because of the national day of the Isle of Man) they thus chose the team closest to this, which is St Johns. All other teams competing have been regular non-FIFA national teams, though. You are right with the fact it was a friendly tournament, more precisely an invitational international tournament. It is planned to take place on a regular basis in future, too.DJLiesel (talk) 19:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Addition I finally found the article of one of the biggest Russian sports media: [9]
References
|
