621:
relegated from the
Isthmian League. The participation in the Vase was the basic reasoning behind the border between Level 10 and Level 11 being the presumed split between notability and non-notability (Special circumstances of individual notability not withstanding). Level 10 now is at about what Level 8 was 20 years ago, it's local football, just a step up from the bulk of county competitions. I'd certainly deem all those clubs whose nominations have been withdrawn as non-notable. Top division of the Hampshire before 1985 - OK, but I'd have difficulty supporting any other Hampshire League clubs. I've been to some of those mentioned here and have seen many other Hampshire League games before it merged into the Wessex, and have a reasonable idea of the standard of play as well. -
48:. Consensus here and precedent previously has been to delete football clubs below a certain level deemed automatically notable. Clubs playing below that level can demonstrate particular notability; none of the clubs nominated but not struck seem to do so. This is important, because if any of the articles to be deleted are in future worked up to demonstrate particular notability (e.g. a significant FA Cup appearance would do the trick nicely) they would overcome this hurdle without the need for promotion through the league system.
765:. As explained above, the four in question played at Step 6 before the current Step 2 (Conference North/South) was introduced - it was the county league level of the time. Using the argument that they played at Step 6 prior to 2004 would mean that most clubs currently at Step 7 are notable, when past consensus states that they are clearly not.
620:
I think that my work has been mis-represented! It was an attempt to show that these clubs are not notable, rather than the other way around. Since the Wessex League was formed, only one
Hampshire League club ever got accepted for the Vase, and that was the special case of Petersfield after they got
647:
On the basis that all these are pretty minor teams, I don't think any of them are notable. Even those which may have had brief spells in the top division of the old
Hampshire League are difficult to find substantial, multiple, non-trivial reliable sources about. Even the likes of Bishop's Waltham
559:. I'll stick to a keep, but I think this would be best dealt with team-by-team. Though as many of these teams did play for years in the old Hampshire League, and Hampshire Premier was Level 9, and presumably Hampshire 1 was Level 10, I'm concerned that some of these other ones may also be notable.
573:
I'll remove Colden Common. However, prior to the creation of the
Conference North/South (2004) every league was one level higher, so I think we should see Level 10 in 1999 as Level 11 today (otherwise this could lead to all teams playing in county leagues prior to 2004 being classed as notable.
791:. I'm not 100% sure the striked through ones oughtn't be deleted, but I'm willing to follow precedent in allowing them. The remaining ones should definitely be deleted per accepted precedent, the lack of reliable coverage at that level, and a general lack of notability.
898:
In terms of knowing which club this user is referring to, I think the bundling is the issue. I don't think they are identical. Three clubs date back to the 1990s, but one dates back to the 1960s, and I'd be a lot more comfortable if the history of that one was known.
440:
stating this. This is the problem with these multiple deletes, as trying to eliminate a half-dozen articles at a time results in a lack of proper review of them. I've previously noted that bundling articles like this doesn't meet the guidlines for bundling in
721:
691:
726:
736:
731:
706:
131:
716:
963:
a few years ago, and that level 9 would be more appropriate for the years these teams were level 10. However as they are borderline, then any useful material should be merged into the
877:
The bundling is not the issue - the articles are identical in terms of content, and it was only confusion over the history of the Wessex/Hampshire League which has caused the problem.
696:
666:
The four that are left have played at Step 6, but not recently. However I am not fully comfortable in removing them as they seem to meet criteria. Where is this "criteria" defined?
701:
859:
Which goes to why we shouldn't be bundling articles into an AFD when there is going to be debate about their notability. It would also help if people followed step III of the
711:
123:
762:
263:
258:
267:
845:
When you say "the club", which one(s) are you actually referring to? I'm completely confused now as to which article(s) are still covered by this AfD..... --
250:
174:, all of which play in the same league and are in the same position regarding their history, and none of whose articles extends beyond five sentences.
130:
Football club that fails to meet the generally accepted notability standard, i.e. having played at Step 6 or above, or in the FA Cup or FA Vase (see
955:. While these teams have played at level 10 historically, I've been convinced that the level 10 criteria should only apply to after the creation of
89:
84:
490:
Actually, it appears that they did play at Step 10 in previous seasons though, so I shall withdraw them. However, I have double-checked on the
93:
355:
350:
309:
304:
76:
359:
313:
217:
212:
134:
for the last similar AfD). Was originally prodded, but removed by IP without explanation. To avoid wasting editors' time, I'll also add
221:
447:
17:
964:
952:
342:
296:
400:
863:, which would make the AFD a lot clearer. I've just done this now at the top of the article - I hope everyone is okay with that.
836:
204:
928:
888:
776:
610:
585:
537:
480:
414:
185:
448:
If any of the articles you are considering for bundling could stand on its own merits, then it should be nominated separately.
994:
36:
832:
596:
254:
976:
933:
908:
893:
872:
854:
840:
821:
800:
781:
675:
661:
630:
615:
590:
568:
542:
485:
460:
419:
392:
190:
57:
831:
The club itself is fine, were there to be any non-criteria players created out of it then they would have to go.
433:
140:
246:
145:
993:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
657:
626:
80:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
437:
346:
850:
300:
338:
165:
208:
494:
and none of the others have played above Wessex 2/3 (renamed in 2006-07, hence the confusion) (see
923:
883:
809:
771:
653:
622:
605:
580:
532:
475:
409:
180:
72:
63:
817:
548:
150:
758:
432:. I've only reviewed the first two teams (well second and third actually), and it's clear that
846:
796:
53:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
750:
960:
956:
556:
466:
292:
161:
860:
442:
972:
904:
868:
671:
564:
552:
456:
388:
200:
170:
156:
135:
913:
The article is wrong, the club (Clanfield) was actually founded in the 1980s (see their
680:
The criteria is defined by the consensus of numerous past AfDs (more than 10),including:
918:
878:
766:
600:
575:
527:
470:
404:
175:
813:
792:
49:
376:
330:
284:
238:
110:
195:
To make it clear, these are the articles that are still part of this nomination:
968:
900:
864:
667:
560:
452:
384:
465:
The website appears to be mistaken - they were at level 11 in 2006-07 - see
914:
595:
I've removed three more following an explanation of the league history
523:
519:
515:
511:
503:
499:
495:
507:
722:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Oakley United F.C. (England)
555:- in the Hampshire Premiere league which is listed as level 9 at
987:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
692:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Brighton
Electricity F.C.
727:
717:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Stansfeld O&BC F.C.
737:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Barnoldswick Town F.C.
732:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Spelthorne Sports F.C.
707:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/F.C. Deportivo
Galicia
697:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/American
Express F.C.
702:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Matlock United F.C.
557:
http://www.tonykempster.co.uk/archive99-00/gridsindex.htm
754:
712:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Cookham Dean F.C.
553:
http://www.tonykempster.co.uk/archive99-00/hampgrid.htm
491:
372:
368:
364:
326:
322:
318:
280:
276:
272:
234:
230:
226:
118:
106:
102:
98:
861:
WP:AFD#How to list multiple related pages for deletion
547:
I haven't gone through all the teams, but it appears
469:(Wessex One is level 10 and BWT were in Wessex Two).
403:'s list of association football related deletions.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
997:). No further edits should be made to this page.
757:, as well as being repeatedly covered in the
8:
551:played at Level 9 in 1999/2000 according to
436:have played at level 10 - and here's a
399:This discussion has been included in
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
753:until it was unilaterally removed
24:
965:Hampshire Premier Football League
953:Hampshire Premier Football League
1:
648:Town. I would be inclined to
749:And was previously part of
1014:
951:any useful information to
247:Clanfield (Hampshire) F.C.
146:Clanfield (Hampshire) F.C.
977:20:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
434:Bishops Waltham Town F.C.
141:Bishops Waltham Town F.C.
58:11:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
990:Please do not modify it.
934:22:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
909:22:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
894:21:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
873:19:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
855:14:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
841:14:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
822:23:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
801:23:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
782:22:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
676:18:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
662:11:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
631:20:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
616:19:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
591:07:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
569:03:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
543:19:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
486:18:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
461:18:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
420:18:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
393:19:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
191:18:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
833:CorleoneSerpicoMontana
761:talk page, including
808:those remaining per
401:WikiProject Football
73:Overton United F.C.
64:Overton United F.C.
549:Colden Common F.C.
151:Colden Common F.C.
44:The result was
438:contemporary link
422:
1005:
992:
961:Conference South
957:Conference North
931:
926:
921:
891:
886:
881:
779:
774:
769:
613:
608:
603:
588:
583:
578:
540:
535:
530:
483:
478:
473:
417:
412:
407:
398:
380:
362:
339:Otterbourne F.C.
334:
316:
293:Hamble Club F.C.
288:
270:
242:
224:
188:
183:
178:
166:Otterbourne F.C.
162:Hamble Club F.C.
121:
114:
96:
34:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1004:
1003:
1002:
1001:
995:deletion review
988:
929:
924:
919:
889:
884:
879:
777:
772:
767:
611:
606:
601:
586:
581:
576:
538:
533:
528:
481:
476:
471:
415:
410:
405:
353:
337:
307:
291:
261:
245:
215:
201:A.F.C. Stoneham
199:
186:
181:
176:
171:Paulsgrove F.C.
157:Fleetlands F.C.
136:A.F.C. Stoneham
117:
87:
71:
67:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1011:
1009:
1000:
999:
982:
980:
979:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
825:
824:
803:
786:
785:
784:
744:
743:
742:
741:
740:
739:
734:
729:
724:
719:
714:
709:
704:
699:
694:
684:
683:
682:
681:
664:
645:
644:
643:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
424:
423:
382:
381:
335:
289:
243:
128:
127:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1010:
998:
996:
991:
985:
984:
983:
978:
974:
970:
966:
962:
958:
954:
950:
947:
935:
932:
927:
922:
916:
912:
911:
910:
906:
902:
897:
896:
895:
892:
887:
882:
876:
875:
874:
870:
866:
862:
858:
857:
856:
852:
848:
844:
843:
842:
838:
834:
830:
827:
826:
823:
819:
815:
811:
807:
804:
802:
798:
794:
790:
787:
783:
780:
775:
770:
764:
760:
756:
752:
748:
747:
746:
745:
738:
735:
733:
730:
728:
725:
723:
720:
718:
715:
713:
710:
708:
705:
703:
700:
698:
695:
693:
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
685:
679:
678:
677:
673:
669:
665:
663:
659:
655:
651:
646:
632:
628:
624:
619:
618:
617:
614:
609:
604:
598:
594:
593:
592:
589:
584:
579:
572:
571:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
545:
544:
541:
536:
531:
525:
521:
517:
513:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
489:
488:
487:
484:
479:
474:
468:
467:Tony Kempster
464:
463:
462:
458:
454:
450:
449:
444:
439:
435:
431:
430:
426:
425:
421:
418:
413:
408:
402:
397:
396:
395:
394:
390:
386:
378:
374:
370:
366:
361:
357:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
315:
311:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
269:
265:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
228:
223:
219:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
197:
196:
193:
192:
189:
184:
179:
173:
172:
167:
163:
159:
158:
154:
152:
147:
143:
142:
137:
133:
125:
120:
115:
112:
108:
104:
100:
95:
91:
86:
82:
78:
74:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
989:
986:
981:
948:
847:ChrisTheDude
828:
805:
788:
649:
446:
428:
427:
383:
194:
169:
155:
149:
139:
129:
70:
45:
43:
31:
28:
520:Otterbourne
516:Hamble Club
429:Strong Keep
46:Delete some
812:. cheers,
650:Delete all
524:Paulsgrove
512:Fleetlands
967:article.
504:Clanfield
814:Struway2
759:WP:FOOTY
508:Colden C
500:Stoneham
132:this AfD
124:View log
915:website
793:Vickser
751:WP:CORP
496:Overton
356:protect
351:history
310:protect
305:history
264:protect
259:history
218:protect
213:history
90:protect
85:history
50:Dweller
920:пﮟოьεԻ
880:пﮟოьεԻ
806:Delete
789:Delete
768:пﮟოьεԻ
602:пﮟოьεԻ
577:пﮟოьεԻ
529:пﮟოьεԻ
472:пﮟოьεԻ
443:WP:AFD
406:пﮟოьεԻ
360:delete
314:delete
268:delete
222:delete
177:пﮟოьεԻ
119:delete
94:delete
969:Nfitz
949:Merge
901:Nfitz
865:Nfitz
668:Nfitz
561:Nfitz
453:Nfitz
385:Nfitz
377:views
369:watch
365:links
331:views
323:watch
319:links
285:views
277:watch
273:links
239:views
231:watch
227:links
122:) – (
111:views
103:watch
99:links
16:<
973:talk
959:and
905:talk
869:talk
851:talk
837:talk
829:Keep
818:talk
810:fchd
797:talk
763:here
755:here
672:talk
658:talk
654:fchd
627:talk
623:fchd
597:here
565:talk
522:and
492:FCHD
457:talk
451:").
389:talk
373:logs
347:talk
343:edit
327:logs
301:talk
297:edit
281:logs
255:talk
251:edit
235:logs
209:talk
205:edit
168:and
107:logs
81:talk
77:edit
54:talk
917:).
526:).
975:)
907:)
871:)
853:)
839:)
820:)
799:)
674:)
660:)
652:-
629:)
599:.
567:)
518:,
514:,
510:,
506:,
502:,
498:,
459:)
445:("
391:)
375:|
371:|
367:|
363:|
358:|
354:|
349:|
345:|
329:|
325:|
321:|
317:|
312:|
308:|
303:|
299:|
283:|
279:|
275:|
271:|
266:|
262:|
257:|
253:|
237:|
233:|
229:|
225:|
220:|
216:|
211:|
207:|
164:,
160:,
148:,
144:,
138:,
109:|
105:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
83:|
79:|
56:)
971:(
930:7
925:5
903:(
890:7
885:5
867:(
849:(
835:(
816:(
795:(
778:7
773:5
670:(
656:(
625:(
612:7
607:5
587:7
582:5
563:(
539:7
534:5
482:7
477:5
455:(
416:7
411:5
387:(
379:)
341:(
333:)
295:(
287:)
249:(
241:)
203:(
187:7
182:5
153:,
126:)
116:(
113:)
75:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.