Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Portugal national football team unofficial games results

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 userfy and then merge. consensus is that we don'tneed a standalone article and that the material will be merged into other pages in due course. I'm userfying the page in the first instance. Spartaz ^Humbug! 05:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal national football team unofficial games results[edit]

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

The list fails WP:NOTSTATS and has no prose. It's not encyclopedic and has no references. Shadowjams (talk) 06:16, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How come it has no prose? It is well explained on the top of the page what the article is all about. It is NOT an indiscriminate collection of information, because it gathers information anyone can find on the internet and books, if you search the Portuguese FA site, or any football-related site, you will find these games, you just won't find them on the FIFA website since they did not oversee these games. Also I don't understand why this is called 'not encyclopedic', it is objective and has no personal opinions what-so-ever. It is of my understanding that only articles of living people created after March 18th, 2010 are sujected to a speedy deletion policy if they have no references, this article isn't biographical. If you found a reason to delete this article, then you would have to delete hundreds, maybe thousands, of other articles. Tibullus (talk) 12:32, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment These could probably be listed in another article. I applaud Tibullus for the project of documenting the history of Portugal's soccer/football team, which is notable enough for its own page. Portugal national football team 1921–1939 results isn't a bad start, although hopefully it will become more readable as time goes on, with more information and less of the gigantic boxes. At the moment, it's kind like listening to a radio station that runs a commercial after every song. Mandsford 13:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment also. I agree with Mandsford. I will say that this article (as it stands now) could be listed in another article and is a candidate for deletion, but I likewise think that Tibullus should have a chance to document the history of Portuguese soccer. Give Tibullus a chance to work with this - this article was nominated for deletion a mere five hours after its creation. Although there's no guarantee that this article will improve, it's worthy information in general, so I'd give it more than five hours. Bds69 (talk) 13:40, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone for the nice, constructive comments. Since I don't want to be in bad terms with anyone (I'm refering to the user who posted the deletion tag on the article), I propose (based on the previous comments) that the results be included in other articles, with a special note identifying them as 'unofficial games'. The only problem is that the games played in 1957 and 1975 would have to wait until an appropriate article is in existance, Portugal national football team 1940–1959 results and Portugal national football team 1960–1979 results accordingly. Those games would have a long wait until being placed in these yet-to-be-created articles. I created Portugal national football team 1921–1939 results a long while ago and it took me some time making it, that's why I fear the job may take some time to be completed. If it is ok to everyone, let's keep this article until I am done with the others. Tibullus (talk) 16:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can work on the 1940-59 and the 1960-79 articles in "userspace" rather than main space, and then bring them up when you're satisfied with how it looks. I work on articles that way, and it allows me to do that in my spare time. A sample page would be called User:Tibullus/Portugal results 1940-59. Click on the red link, and you'll have what works out to be your own page; when you're ready to post the finished product, you'd copy it over to a new page. Give some consideration to the idea of making it less crowded. Instead of an individual section for 1926, for instance, you could have a table that said 24 January 1926, followed by 29 May 1927, etc. Also, you might consider a shorter way to list the venue-- "Estádio José Manuel Soares, Lisbon" runs long, the way "Giants Stadium, East Rutherford, New Jersey, USA" might. Just some suggestions. I think it's a great project. Mandsford 18:59, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:46, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Portugal national football team; info about these games is worth a mention in a 'History' section, but no need for a seperate article. Giant Snowman 20:54, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all these suggestions and motivating messages, I will see if I can work right now on the Portugal national football team 1921–1939 results page, in particular fix that 'gigantism' and add the corresponding unofficial games there. To the user who suggested a merge in the 'History' section, I don't think it is a good idea, since people would see the eventual exposure of these games and would continously add other official games there. This was my first point of interest in creating all these pages, since the Portugal national football team article included dozens of games. However a merge should occur, I just don't think that option is the best suitable. Now, I will edit the 1921–1939 results page, as it feels that you are looking at a dry paint whenever you scroll it all the way down. Tibullus (talk) 23:08, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, as per GiantSnowman. Unofficial games should be placed in the same place as the official ones, there is no need for a separate page --Carioca (talk) 19:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - As the nom I'm absolutely fine with userfying or merging to a yearly stats page that has significant content. Shadowjams (talk) 08:35, 6 November 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.