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. j⚛e decker ^talk 00:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IFFHS best clubs of the 20th century[edit]

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

No evidence of independent notability from International Federation of Football History & Statistics, as well as potential copyright issues. Article should be deleted, or at most merged back into the parent article. A similar article, IFFHS continental Clubs of the 20th Century, has previously been deleted by PROD. Giant Snowman 08:33, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:34, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The International Federation of Football History & Statistics (IFFHS) is a credible international football organisation, it's maked and published this famous vote on 2009 (The book on Barnes & Noble). --Fayçal.09 (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But that article is not up for deletion - this is. Where is the "significant coverage" of this particular award in reliable, third-party sources, as required by WP:GNG? Why does it deserve a separate article from the main IFFHS page? Giant Snowman 14:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mr GiantSnowman, for me, no probleme if we merge with IFFHS page but I think it's important to separate the articles same as IFFHS World's Best Club Coach or IFFHS World's Best Goalkeeper. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 19:33, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - and those article probably also need deleting/merging. Giant Snowman 19:36, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:NOTSTATS. Perhaps worthy of discussion on the organisation's page. Fenix down (talk) 15:36, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and Fenix. WP:NOTSTATS. SW3 5DL (talk) 23:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Fayçal.09's indication that the IFFHS is an organisation capable of producing notable materials. Article is succinct although perhaps the continents might be alphabetised or an explanation of the order of the lists might be given. The links system on the IFFHS' page looks servicable. Copyright seems to be main negative argument if valid Gregkaye (talk) 10:49, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Gregkaye: - no-one is doubting that IFFHS as an organisation is notable; so please can you show why this particular sub-article justifies a separate article? Giant Snowman 12:11, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTSTATS. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:07, 19 June 2014 (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.