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. There appears to be clear consensus that the future existence of this team is highly speculative and that it therefore does not meet the notability criteria. None of the keep comments have raised any evidence or compelling arguments that this reasoning is flawed. TigerShark (talk) 23:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philadelphia Major League Soccer team[edit]

Included in this discussion are the following miscellaneous pages as they are invariably related to the article:

This article seems to be a bit of WP:CRYSTAL and is written in a way that makes it appear that Philadelphia actually has a Major League Soccer team. While Philadelphia is in the running for a MLS expansion team, the city has not been selected as an expansion city yet. The article seems to have been created in response to Pennsylvania approving funding for a stadium complex in Chester, Pennsylvania.[1] You may also wish to note that the source I just provided is from the official MLS website and they note that the expansion team selection process is not complete yet. Bobblehead ^(rants) 07:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of football (soccer) related deletions. Bobblehead ^(rants) 08:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Some funding for the stadium has been granted. This does not a franchise make. Including this article under "Phila MLS team" clearly implies there is such a thing. There isn't a Philadelphia franchise at present. I hope that there will be one, but there isn't. If the creator of the page wants to keep this info on Wikipedia, I suggest it be moved to a category/page more representative (one dealing with potential expansion teams, for example). I'd be more than happy to see this page return when a team is actually awarded to Philadelphia. Posthocergopropterhoc (talk) 22:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Recreate if Philadelphia is actually chosen. We don't have articles on individual country's bids to host the world cup, and I can't really see how this is different. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 08:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article per WP:CRYSTAL (template & category have to be dealt with separately). No harm mentioning the proposed team in the main Major League Soccer article but such speculation should not have an article of its own yet. Qwghlm (talk) 10:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article - per Qwghlm. The MLS Template states that Seattle will be an expansion team in 2009, no mention of Philadelphia...yet. Recreate when/if it becomes a franchise. GiantSnowman (talk) 12:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Title is clearly misleading and wrong. Peanut4 (talk) 14:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - the title isn't misleading as MLS clearly intends to add Philly in the very near future. Here's evidence: [2]

JaMikePA (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment That story does not say Philadelphia will definitely have an MLS team. Yes, it looks likely, but at this stage, it just isn't so. Peanut4 (talk) 15:35, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to an appropriate article discussing the ongoing selection process. Re-create later if developments warrant. Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Currently violates WP:CRYSTAL. We can add the team to Wikipedia next year if it becomes notable. --Amlebede (talk) 21:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented.
- Delete. The sun rising tomorrow is "almost certain." My going to bed in the next couple of hours is "almost certain." Expansion teams are never "almost certain," and violate WP:CRYSTAL until an official announcement from Commission Garber himself. A Philly team is likely, no question, but said "preparation for the event" could very well lead to nothing. --Roehl Sybing (talk) 01:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is well documented, citing sources. I would greatly appreciate it if policies weren't taken out of context to suit your own opinions. JaMikePA (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. As a comparison, Chester Stadium is not WP:CRYSTAL because an official vote opened up funding for the stadium and thus made its construction imminent. The article in question, however, cannot boast such a degree of certainty (although the article erroneously says that Philly will participate in MLS as if it was, as I said before, the sun rising tomorrow) until the franchise is ultimately awarded. The best we can say is that it has front-runner status to be team 16, but that is still WP:CRYSTAL. --Roehl Sybing (talk) 01:55, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

if there are sources that say what you just told us, doesn't that make the article already suitable?DGG (talk) 05:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe it is. But if you could specify what it is you think I told you, perhaps I can tell you what I think is WP:CRYSTAL and what is not. --Roehl Sybing (talk) 06:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there are sources to show it is being discussed that it may be the front runner for team 16, teat would seem sufficient to avoid Crysal Ball.20:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete. A casual reader would think that Philadelphia already has been awarded an MLS team after reading this article. Misleading and a clear example of WP:CRYSTAL Mikerichi (talk) 12:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Agreed. As this article is written it seems like Philly has already been awarded a franchise or at worst is the front runner for a franchise. Limasbravo (talk) 16:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resubmit AFD, please There are problems with this AFD which make it more difficult to process. I see that there are far more deletes. However, AFD's is a discussion, not a vote. Some people are commenting on the template and category. Others comment on the article. There should be a separate AFD. I see more merits in the article than in the category. Comments that the article is poorly written is not a delete criteria. Notability, not quality of writing, is a criteria. WP:CRYSTAL is not an automatic reason for deletion. There is already a company formed. I believe there are some reasons for keep (the company). This article could be written to become a potentially very interesting article on what was done to start the team, even if the efforts were unsuccessful. Since AFD's are a discussion and not a vote, I ask the deciding admin to consider "no consensus to delete, default to keep + consider resubmitting separate AFD on template and category" Archtransit (talk) 17:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So... What you're saying is that this article shouldn't be deleted because the article should be renamed FC Pennsylvania Stadium L.L.C. and all of the current content should be removed and replaced with information about what the company and the government of Pennsylvania have done to get a MLS team moved to Chester? Isn't that pretty much a deletion? I'm also confused on what you mean by some people are commenting on the template and category. The only comment I see on the category and template is one saying that they should be handled separately (I'm guessing on WP:TFD and WP:CFD). I'll admit that I should have seen that comment and moved the template and category off this AFD, but from what I can tell everyone is commenting on the article. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 20:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The fact that preparations are being made and that fan groups have already been organised (with a reasonable amount of press coverage) means that this is an interesting and potentially useful article. Sure, the team does not yet exist, but I still believe the subject of the article is an notable one. Robotforaday (talk) 21:19, 9 February 2008 (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.