Since, per WP:NTEAM, teams and clubs have to demonstrate WP:GNG for a standalone article, then this fails WP:GNG as there's nothing to establish notability. Pieces from Hoorse Media ([1], [2]) can not be considered independent as they sponsor the club. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It does seem slightly odd to discount sources from what appears to be a reliable media source for the region because they support the club given the region, but there's other sources out there which can be used to improve the article such as [3] and mentions in [4] and [5]. Another problem here is most of this part of the world happens on Facebook. SportingFlyerT·C 23:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bosaso FC is an existing local sports club in Somalia with sponsorship of Horseed Media Group. Page deserves not to delate as editor from Somalia club is existing Muscab30 (talk) 23:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let me recommend we should not delete this page. Club is an existing local sport club in Somalia. Muscab30 (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep There are reliable sources here, as sponsorships don't detract from journalistic independence. Indeed, sponsorship adds to the team's notability. The team is simply not mainstream or well covered. This feels like a further example of unconscious WP:BIAS discounting teams, players, etc. from places like Somalia. Anwegmann (talk) 00:02, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep as per discussion the source of the reference used other reliable sources from different pages. Muscab30 (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the football club exists, but the only (single) news source about the club is by the news outlet that sponsors the club. WP:GNG needs multiple, independent reliable sources that are more than just passing mentions (source 4 doesn't mention the club at all). Sionk (talk) 00:11, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is not the only single news source there is different source used check the page or are related and are original language is Somali language since the team is in SOMALIA Muscab30 (talk) 15:22, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Answer for the sorce 4 the source four is related tgis topic is about Puntland the state responsible the team area is the federal member state of Somalia responsible managing snd regulating football in the area of Bosaso FC. Bosaso FC operates under Puntland. Muscab30 (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is incorrect - source 4 clearly states Bosaso FC is owned by Bosaso City- the commercial town of Puntland in Bari region. There's enough here for a stand-alone article. SportingFlyerT·C 18:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 13:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. A source analysis (it need not be formal) would be helpful. Also, User:Muscab30, please strike one of your bolded "votes" as I'm not sure which one reflects your current opinion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are four sources in the article - one from the UN, which isn't great; one from Puntlandes, which is coverage of the league, but also includes a few sentences specifically on the club which can be used to expand the article, and is similar the type of coverage I look for when creating articles on clubs; a DW article which doesn't specifically mention the club; and a cable TV interview on Youtube, which would generally be considered unreliable but is clearly a cable TV network putting up one of their broadcasts. In the AfD, there are two good articles from the newspaper which sponsors the team which don't appear to be promotional in any way; a Warsom article about a friendly Bosaso played in that the president of Puntland attended, which is excellent coverage; a reference in a scholarly article which can be used in the article to describe who owns the team, but is not GNG-qualifying; and a fixture list for the league which features an alternate spelling of the team. Between the sponsoring newspaper, the Puntlandes article, and the Warsom article, it's a pass in my opinion, but if we're going to be strict and say that the sponsoring newspaper doesn't count, it becomes more marginal. As I've already noted, most of the media coverage for Puntland actually happens on Facebook, so if we're going to go letter of the law GNG it's more likely to be redirected, but if we go spirit of GNG and say that we need reliable sources which show that the club has been written about by secondary sources, it's a keep. I'm still strongly advocating for this to be kept. SportingFlyerT·C 00:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: most of news in Somalia are in Facebook so it's very limited to find websites written about such areas, so I believe it's unfair to mark this article "deletion" dealing contextual argument will improve diverse approach of dealing such situations. The only thing that you believed in horseedmedia media is the sponsor of the this club and can't be referred to source, first Horseed Media is well-known and respected Media station in Somalia with reliable information in Somalia context, secondly, we used other source to follow your directives and rules mentioned above as editor, contributor and creator of this article I believe it's completely appropriate rules and regulations of Wikipedia and should be accepted. Muscab30 (talk) 23:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Longer note below, it broke the template Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarMississippi 13:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Closing admin note, I had closed this as The result was redirect to List of football clubs in Somalia as a viable ATD. Consensus is sourcing is of insufficient independence. This isn't as close as it looks with a keep noting the team is neither mainstream nor well covered, which negates the !vote which I still believe to be a correct read. @SportingFlyer: raised some good points at my Talk about the points they'd raised above and I offered to relist in lieu of DRV. StarMississippi 13:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]