Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premier Soccer League 2008–09 results
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 was delete. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Premier Soccer League 2008–09 results[edit]
- Premier Soccer League 2008–09 results (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
As discussed in Premier League, such result is not in a encyclopedia scope. I suggest merge the cross-table into the main article and delete the sub-page Matthew_hk tc 11:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Although an article about a sports league's season is acceptable, we should stop short of reporting the score of every game played. [[WP:#NOTSTATS]] discourages the recitation of long lists of statistics, such as the batting averages of every baseball player during a particular year, and [[WP:#NOTNEWS]] would be applicable as well. I agree with Matt that the cross-table would be an appropriate addition to the article about the 2008-09 season for South Africa's top-level (soccer) football league. Mandsford (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. GiantSnowman 16:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge and redirect to the season article (Premier Soccer League 2008–09). GiantSnowman 16:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The main season article already has a table of results (a complete one too, I might add), so there's nothing else left to merge. Bettia it's a puppet! 09:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, as per Bettia. Duplicated info. --Carioca (talk) 19:12, 7 June 2009 (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.