Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sports clubs owned by other sports clubs

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 --Mike Cline (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of sports clubs owned by other sports clubs[edit]

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

per WP:NOTREPOSITORY this is an indiscriminate collection of internal links, due to globalisation more and more companies are swallowing up more than one football club it isn't anything notable any more. Mo ainm~Talk 16:13, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Cliff smith ^talk 23:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: If the internal links thing is a problem, ask for List of stadiums by capacity to be deleted as that is worse than this. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS Mo ainm~Talk 19:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 06:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - articles such as List of feeder teams in football serve more purpose than this article. The contents should be merged into sport-specific, referenced lists. Giant Snowman 06:58, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If there is any verifiable content to merge, I would support that. But since there are, like on all of The C of E's articles, zero sources cited there is nothing verifiable to merge. I have already removed one inaccurate claim from this article, a brief check shows me there are several other inaccurate or highly dubious claims on there. Articles such as this harm the credibility of the encyclopedia. O Fenian (talk) 09:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So London Irish Amateur is unsourced then? I did create that one and it's sourced so I'm afraid your point that all the articles I have created are unsourced is incorrect. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 09:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. O Fenian (talk) 09:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's an older revision, not the one that was there before you redirected. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 10:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is the first version, thus proving that your claim of "I'm afraid your point that all the articles I have created are unsourced is incorrect" is not disproved by that particular article. Since the articles you create are generally replete with factual errors, I suggest not starting any further unsourced article since this is an encyclopedia not a place for you to publish things you believe to be true which are actually not. O Fenian (talk) 11:05, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may be the 1st revision, but it was eventually sourced. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Utter trivia, unknown selection rules (if any). I expected something non-trivial (like the Formula 1 team ownership history) ... but the list says "these few clubs (why these?) own farm/feeder/reserve clubs... they even share names!" What a curious discovery that even needs no references. East of Borschov 11:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I see where this is going so I have userfied it with the hope of maybe bringing it back in future after improvements and sources. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:11, 22 July 2010 (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.