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. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 16:10, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peterborough ICA Sports Football Club[edit]

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

I don't believe that this club meets WP:NFOOTY - the league they play in is not on of the WP:FPL leagues Gbawden (talk) 13:57, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not playing in a FPL is not an issue, notability is determined by meeting WP:GNG and/or playing in the national cup competition - this club meets neither. Giant Snowman 14:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do not Delete - this football club has historical importance. When the club was formed, Italian migrants accounted for 10% of Peterborough's population and set up this football club as part of the ICA who are a charitable organisation (Company Charity Number: 290845). There is therefore historical importance attached to this club. The ICA Foxes Development squads (part of ICA Sports, described in the article) play against Premier and Football League clubs too. The PDFL Premier Division is also at Step 7 of the National Leagues System. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icasportsfcraph (talk • contribs) 14:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - plays below the level deemed appropriate for an article by WP:FOOTY -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
~~Do not Delete~~ - my argument for retaining this article is based around its historical significance. Even in 1996 the Peterborough Italian community and the associated community groups were deemed relevant for research paper discussion (https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=paper27.pdf&site=11). The football club was integral to the migrant Italian community which at one point accounted for 10% of the population of Peterborough -- Icasportsfcraph (talk 17:10, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- That paper could help to establish notability for the general topic of Italians in Peterborough but has only the most cursory mention of this football club, so doesn't help to establish notability there. Oh, and while it's permissible to add further comments, there is no need to restate your "do not delete" !vote -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:26, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for adding "do not delete" again. I'm new to Wikipedia and indeed to html or coding etc. so you can imagine that this page took me some time to create, hence my defence. I would also add that our Club President Paul Canoville also makes us notable. -- Icasportsfcraph (talk 21:01, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Club has not competed in the national stages of a cup competition, so fails WP:FOOTYN. The level at which the junior teams play is not considered relevant for notability purposes. Youth teams must satisfy GNG directly (see Senrab FC). The club president may be notable in himself, but notability is not inherited and there is nothing shown to indicate that the team have gained significant reliable coverage sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG. Fenix down (talk) 13:15, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No indication of notability. IJA (talk) 14:18, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- You guys should be encouraging people to add content, not discouraging. Teams such as Peterborough Northern Star and Peterborough Sports are allowed pages but they play in the FA Vase not the FA Cup, so your criteria are not universally applied. My page isn't poorly written and if you measure the number of hits it receives I'm sure you'll see there is a demand. We have over 500 registered players & staff across all sides and I'll add some sources from secondary media as further evidence of notability Icasportsfcraph (talk 14:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - If you can add sources that would certainly go a long way to establishing notability, but note that they must be from reliable third-party sources (major news sites or equivalent sources with a known reputation for editorial fact-checking) and cover the club in depth i.e. not just mentions in passing or listings in directories of clubs or results. Hope that helps. Oh, and by the way Peterborough NS do compete in the FA Cup. If Peterborough Sports don't then potentially their article should be put up for deletion too, but that's a discussion for elsewhere...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:56, 6 February 2015 (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.