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. J04n(talk page) 02:29, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chester F.C. players[edit]

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

PROD contested by an IP, who appears to be a local football historian (?) who is using Wikipedia as a personal record-keeping website, which is obviously not acceptable. As for the article itself, while list of a club's footballers can be notable, that is usually only professional clubs in fully-professional leagues (which this club is not) as playing for the club does not make one notable per WP:NFOOTBALL. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the topic of 'Chester F.C. players' has received significant media coverage, so it also fails WP:GNG. Giant Snowman 08:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 08:26, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A list of players for Chester City F.C. might be notable, but this is a different team, formed in 2010, that's never been in a professional league, so it's hard to see how it meets notability guidelines. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chester F.C. for now, until this newer team has been around a bit longer. This appears to be good info; why throw the baby out with the bathwater when it's entirely reasonable to expect this list would be appropriate later on? —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 11:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. czar · · 16:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. czar · · 16:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Chester F.C. does not meet the criteria of WP:NFOOTY. However, the formation of the club from the ashes of the former Chester City F.C. generated substantial non-routine media coverage, which demonstrates notability of the new club under WP:GNG (see the sources of the Chester F.C. article for examples of this coverage). Since the club is notable, its body of players as a whole is notable since they are an intrinsic part of the club, even though the players individually mostly aren't notable. Under WP:CSC, it is reasonable to have a list in which most or all of the entries are not sufficiently notable to have their own article. Dricherby (talk) 08:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to conveniently ignore the part of CSC which states "Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future." It is NOT reasonable at all to expect any of these red-links to turn blue anytime soon. Giant Snowman 12:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That only applies to the case where all the elements of the list are individually notable. In this case, they're not so the redlinks should just be unlinked. Dricherby (talk) 13:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There will always be more red-links than blue-links. You're also forgetting the topic itself isn't notable. Giant Snowman 15:54, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has many lists where all or most of the individual entries are non-notable, per WP:CSC. You can't use the non-notability of the list's entries to argue that the list as a whole is not notable. What is your reasoning behind the assertion that the list of players of a notable football club is not itself notable? Dricherby (talk) 17:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because neither the topic, nor the players that make up the topic, meet WP:GNG - it is very simple. Giant Snowman 17:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Chester F.C.. I am doubtful on whether we should have that article, but the club claims to be a successor to Chester City F.C. and is rising fast up the minor leagues. The list of 1st team players in the article has many blue links, which probably justifies its existence. However, lists with a lot of red-links encourage the creation of articles on people who are probably NN and thus should not have an article. With weekly gates of under 3000, it is doubtful if the club will rise to a level where it would normallyu be notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:06, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chester F.C. is notable because of the large amount of coverage given to the creation of the club. That notability is not temporary, regardless of the club's future performance. The question here is whether the list of players meets the notability criteria. Dricherby (talk) 17:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Which it doesn't. Giant Snowman 17:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - A list of this type should list players who have competed at a notable level of football. Once the club reaches a level that would confer notability on its players, that is when we should create a list. – Pee Jay 13:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A list of Chester City F.C. players would be fine because that club competed in the Football League. Chester F.C. has not. Argyle 4 Life^talk 17:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I feel they have a significant following despite any comments on the level. In the future they will be professional and also this list will be useful, plus surely it is excellent to have complete records available, this not being the case with most clubs! 94.9.212.245 (User_talk:94.9.212.245), 17:19, 6 May 2013‎ This comment was left, unsigned, on the talk page associated with this AfD so I copied it here. Dricherby (talk) 16:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:LISTN tells me that there is no requirement that every entry in a stand-alone list should be notable if the list should be regarded as notable, and I don't think we need to look hard to find sources that discuss "Chester F.C. players" as a group or a set to make this list pass the notability guideline for stand-alone lists. The red links to non-notable players should be removed though. Mentoz86 (talk) 01:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested to know where these sources are. Giant Snowman 11:08, 7 May 2013 (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.