Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Europeada 2008

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 delete. Stifle (talk) 18:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Europeada 2008[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Extremely non-notable football competition. Only Google results seem to be Wikimirrors, Facebook, etc. No hits at all in Google News, suggesting the tournament got no coverage whatsoever -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. According to a comment on this page the so-called 'Wales' team come from the Cardiff and District Premier League. That's tier 7 in the not-exactly-mighty Welsh football league system. Stu.W UK (talk) 21:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above; a minor, minor tournament. Giant Snowman 12:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

strong support non-FIFA football tournaments may not get as big a coverage but they do have a large presence (see the size of the teams for the football tournament). at any rate, how does it become non-notable all of a sufdden? because 1 person sugested a possible from the 2010 edition? (which was obviously ready for deletion as it didnt happen) it was pertinent and heavily viwed/edted when it happened.

also, voting is not tallied per Stu.W UK just because one team is listed wrongly doesnt make th e whole page non-notable to delete. One can improve instead of deleteing it.

Likewirse GiantSnowman WP:Consensus notes you need a reason not "as above"Lihaas (talk) 22:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Lihaas - find some evidence of WP:N and I'll change my vote. From what I could see from google, Chris is right - no news articles and a few fan comments Stu.W UK (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

notable through the supranational entity "Federal Union of European Nationalities"Lihaas (talk) 22:01, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited. The FUEN is a notable organisation, but their football tournament isn't. It's like saying a barbecue is notable if it's hosted by the UN. I have no idea why I thought of that as an example, but there you go. You've edited about a billion articles so I'm sure you know all this. Find sources that meet the WP:GNG then it'll be notable.Stu.W UK (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I found this and [1] this which is a rather meagre amount of sourcing for a soccer tournament. Coverage of the tournament as it progressed appears not to have really happened. I am not convinced of notability with the sourcing I've found and the article itself has no independent sources. -- Whpq (talk) 14:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.4meter4 (talk) 08:12, 26 February 2011 (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.