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 no consensus. Opinions are roughly split equally between keeping and deleting. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:57, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ormideia FC[edit]

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

Fails ~~WP:NSPORT for football clubs~~WP:NORG. De-prodded by page creator without rationale. DrStrauss talk 13:14, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - A team that has participation at 3rd and 4th level of national league system. If I have understand correctly you don't think that teams from 3rd and 4th level of national league system are notable. But why not? This is not happened for other countries? That levels are national. Xaris333 (talk) 13:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It would appear that we have articles on all clubs that play in the third/fourth tiers in Cyprus. In addition, the deletion rationale is completely invalid as WP:NSPORT does not apply to football clubs (from the guideline: "It is not intended that this guideline should apply to sports clubs and teams"). Number 57 09:06, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Regarding the WP:OSE comment below, it would appear that the editor is unaware that OSE is an entirely valid reason for keeping articles ("When used correctly, these comparisons are important as the encyclopedia should be consistent in the content that it provides or excludes"). But anyway, a cursory search of Greek language hits for the club's name suggests that there are plenty of sources on the club. This could probably do with a Greek speaker helping out, but I find it concerning that WP:SYSTEMATICBIAS may be in play here given how low down the ladder we allow articles on clubs in English speaking countries. Number 5 7 22:08, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57: I've updated my nomination to correct that. DrStrauss talk 17:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above it plays 3rd and 4th level of national league system .Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:36, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But, to be notable, the team has to play at the highest level. Four levels down fails criteria. Ifnord (talk) 17:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- for lack of reliable sources that discuss the subject directly and in detail (WP:N). If participation in the 3rd and 4th divisions are considered to confer notability, then I this view is too permissive. In any case, the sports clubs are not covered by WP:NSPORT, so there's not guideline that specifies that 3rd and 4th-tier clubs are by default notable; they need to meet WP:GNG. The other "Keep" rationale is along the lines of WP:OSE: "It would appear that we have articles on all clubs that play in the third/fourth tiers in Cyprus".

The article contains no encyclopedically relevant prose and consists of nothing but a stats table. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. No sources have been presented at this AfD; an article should not be kept without sources being demonstrated. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets the relevant guidelines as stated above. If people believe the guidelines should be changed, they should establish consensus to change them, not arbitrarily pick off articles one by one. Smartyllama (talk) 20:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smartyllama: Could you indicate which guidelines you have in mind? I'm asking because it was pointed out above that WP:NSPORT does not apply to football clubs. If you could clarify, that would be great. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:48, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is that clubs who have played in a national cup are notable. This doesn't necessarily grant notability to the players on these teams, but the clubs themselves are notable. Smartyllama (talk) 12:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:19, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes FOOTYN, has played in a national competition. Seems to generate plenty of coverage, such as this. Fenix down (talk) 11:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets football club notability requirements, having played in the national cup. Giant Snowman 20:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not meet football club notability, which requires teams to play in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists). It is unverifiable that Ormideia FC has played in the Cypriot Cup, which is the national cup of Cyprus. Failing the sports club notability criterion, WP:GNG has to be met for it to pass notability but I'm unable to locate any significant coverage of reliable sources that are independent of the topic. — Za wl 10:32, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Zawl. Four levels down from the top league doesn't make a team notable. Ifnord (talk) 17:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 18:15, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Low level team that is not-notable. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No independent evidence this team has played for a national cup and it is only a low tier team. There is evidence from sources that this team exists but nothing rises to the level notability. Fails WP:ORG and WP:N, which are the applicable guidelines. Nothing in WikiProject Football indicates notability for this team. Hence, it also fails WP:FPL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve Quinn (talk • contribs) 18:54, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Wikipedia is not a farm for statistics and is not a sports magazine. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 19:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete lacks RS. Fails GNG. Primary sources. fails WP:NORG.Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:33, 3 October 2017 (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.