- 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. MBisanz talk 01:05, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Toronto FC II league record by opponent
[edit]- Toronto FC II league record by opponent (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
So out of date. Low level team. Basically a WP:FANCRUFT article that has been abandoned and isn't even viewed. RedPatch (talk) 14:19, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons and since Category Toronto FC II players already covers it:
- List of Toronto FC II players (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am also nominating the following related pages because for the same reasons.
- List of Toronto FC II records and statistics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
RedPatch (talk) 14:21, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment it's not all from 2015 though. There's a couple seasons worth of stats in there. RedPatch (talk) 20:05, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- True - merge to Toronto FC II as appropriate. We don't perhaps need the record against every other team, but the list of players and some of the stats are more relevant. Nfitz (talk) 14:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Other team articles don't have massive lists of former players and Category Toronto FC II players already fills that use. The records could be useful, but the data is so out of date that it's not useful. It'd effectively need to be completely re-done, so it's more of a WP:TNT situation in my mind since at least half the stuff is now wrong/outdated. RedPatch (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:44, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:54, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment so apart from the current state of the articles, which is clearly lacking, I don't see what makes this cruft any more than something like Milton Keynes Dons F.C. league record by opponent. And I know WP:OSE is a weak argument, but I am unclear as to where the line is drawn. Is it because it is a reserve side? What is the standard required for such an article? Because WP:NOTSTATS also makes it clear that such articles can exist. Is it a sourcing issue for this particular team? Just trying to clear up what here is the issue. Jay eyem (talk) 00:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment My reasoning is that it's so out of date, plus the fact it is a reserve side in the third tier. I've basically been the main editor keeping this team's regular page up to date over the last couple of years and even I find this a bit unnecessary, and if I'm not going to update it, it's doubtful anyone will. This was basically last updated after 2016, when the team was founded in 2015. Basically in my mind it's a situation where the article is never going to be fixed and there's next to no interest in it (page views are next to non existant apart from a sharp spike the day this was nominated), so it's not needed. What's the point of an article with incorrect information. RedPatch (talk) 01:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmmm alright, I'm a bit neutral on this. Part of me thinks a WP:TNT would be appropriate since it is so out of date, but part of me also thinks that the article can be salvaged and that deletion is not cleanup. I don't want to make a judgement on the notability of the subject without a bit more information, but either way these articles are certainly in need of improvement if not deletion. Jay eyem (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into Toronto FC II. Interesting information, although some cleanup is needed. Not worth a standalone article, though. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 17:36, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I was the nominator, but seeing as there are multiple votes for Merge, I am okay with that and then I will try to clean it up with what's relevant. Obviously some of the stuff might be a little too much for a regular article, but I'll try to work it through. I still prefer delete as my primary option though. RedPatch (talk) 17:58, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete all. NOTSTATS. No Great Shaker (talk) 23:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete all they all violate WP:NOTSTATS. I don't see anything worth merging, as it would just bloat the parent article and add no benefit. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:58, 25 March 2022 (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.