- 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. Stifle ( talk) 13:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
FK Trudbenik Beograd
- FK Trudbenik Beograd ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
CSD tag removed, then replaced by the same editor who removed it, then removed by an editor claiming the club participated in the 2010–11 Kup Srbije (Serbian Cup), thus meeting WP:FOOTYN. However, the club did not participate in that tournament, nor can I find any information that it ever competed in that cup or its predecessors. Absent any further information, the club fails FOOTYN. — Jkudlick t c s 05:39, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick t c s 05:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick t c s 05:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. — Jkudlick t c s 05:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick t c s 05:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 09:14, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - meets WP:FOOTYN by playing in the Kup Srbije, the national cup - see here. Just Chilling ( talk) 22:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- Your source shows they participated in qualification for the 2011–12 Kup Srbije, not in the tournament proper (also see tournament proper
here). By not participating in the tournament proper, they fail FOOTYN. According to your definition, the vast majority of clubs in every league would meet FOOTYN because they participate in qualifying for their national cups. —
Jkudlick
t
c
s 00:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know what you mean by "not participating in the tournament proper". That concept is certainly not applied to English clubs, for example, where clubs participating in qualifying rounds before what is known as the 'First round proper' are considered notable. Why should Serbian clubs face a different standard? Countries call their early rounds by different names, eg, qualifying, preliminary, regional and some just number through. The test surely is: 'have the club entered a round from which they can win through and lift the trophy'? If so by any reasonable interpretation they have 'have played in the national cup'. And yes, in some countries this opens notability to many clubs; for example in England notability extends deep into semi-professional regional leagues and 736 teams entered this season's FA Cup and an unknown number more may have been eligible but chose not to enter.
Just Chilling (
talk) 01:23, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- I understand your point, but would you also say that 203 nations participated in the
2014 FIFA World Cup? That's how many nations participated in
qualification. —
Jkudlick
t
c
s 03:18, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with you that the numbers are potentially large but this is a consequence of the standard that, FWIW, I think is too low but that is another story ... Just Chilling ( talk) 15:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- I understand your point, but would you also say that 203 nations participated in the
2014 FIFA World Cup? That's how many nations participated in
qualification. —
Jkudlick
t
c
s 03:18, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't know what you mean by "not participating in the tournament proper". That concept is certainly not applied to English clubs, for example, where clubs participating in qualifying rounds before what is known as the 'First round proper' are considered notable. Why should Serbian clubs face a different standard? Countries call their early rounds by different names, eg, qualifying, preliminary, regional and some just number through. The test surely is: 'have the club entered a round from which they can win through and lift the trophy'? If so by any reasonable interpretation they have 'have played in the national cup'. And yes, in some countries this opens notability to many clubs; for example in England notability extends deep into semi-professional regional leagues and 736 teams entered this season's FA Cup and an unknown number more may have been eligible but chose not to enter.
Just Chilling (
talk) 01:23, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- Your source shows they participated in qualification for the 2011–12 Kup Srbije, not in the tournament proper (also see tournament proper
here). By not participating in the tournament proper, they fail FOOTYN. According to your definition, the vast majority of clubs in every league would meet FOOTYN because they participate in qualifying for their national cups. —
Jkudlick
t
c
s 00:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - Don't see any evidence of the team having competed in the nationals stages of any competition, which is the usual benchmark for club notability. A case of too soon at best. There seems to be a bit of confusion above. The issue here is that the qualifying rounds for the Serbian Cup are done on a regional basis, whereas the qualifying rounds for the FA Cup are done on a wholly national basis from the word go, so any club can draw any club. The current consensus is that clubs are only notable once they have competed in the national stages of any competition, this club does not appear ever to have done so, nor does it appear to have garnered significant reliabel coverage for any other activities to satisfy GNG. Fenix down ( talk) 10:29, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, but the basis for your argument is incorrect. As
FA Cup states: "The qualifying rounds are regionalised ..." If the consensus is that teams who have only played in the main, non-regionalised part of a cup tornament are automatically notable then the essay should state that. Further, it should apply to all countries including England.
Just Chilling (
talk) 23:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- You're quite right, I didn't believe that they were regionalised. Nevertheless, NFOOTY is always trumped by GNG and one appearance in a regional qualifying round for a cup competition is an awfully long way away from GNG. Where is the non- routine coverage (i.e., not just match reports / stat sites) for the club? Fenix down ( talk) 10:10, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, but the basis for your argument is incorrect. As
FA Cup states: "The qualifying rounds are regionalised ..." If the consensus is that teams who have only played in the main, non-regionalised part of a cup tornament are automatically notable then the essay should state that. Further, it should apply to all countries including England.
Just Chilling (
talk) 23:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - didn't played in the Serbian Cup but just in preliminary tournament. FkpCascais ( talk) 16:53, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA 1000 01:57, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA 1000 01:57, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Did NOT play in the cup, only qualifying (if that counts, every team is notable, even my club), so not notable.
Kante4 (
talk) 15:58, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- It went as far the 1/8 finals, please see better again
here.
FkpCascais (
talk) 14:29, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- That was the 1/8 finals in the Belgrade Region qualification tournament. Only 1 team from the region (
Šumadija) advanced to the tournament proper. If every team that participates in qualification for a cup tournament is to be considered as having participated in the tournament, then just about every team in every amateur league worldwide could be considered notable. That is the reason FOOTYN states that a club must participate in a cup tournament, not merely in qualification for that tournament. —
Jkudlick
t
c
s 00:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- You are right Jkudlick! My mistake for not looking carefully. I am changing my vote to Delete. Thanks. FkpCascais ( talk) 21:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- That was the 1/8 finals in the Belgrade Region qualification tournament. Only 1 team from the region (
Šumadija) advanced to the tournament proper. If every team that participates in qualification for a cup tournament is to be considered as having participated in the tournament, then just about every team in every amateur league worldwide could be considered notable. That is the reason FOOTYN states that a club must participate in a cup tournament, not merely in qualification for that tournament. —
Jkudlick
t
c
s 00:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- It went as far the 1/8 finals, please see better again
here.
FkpCascais (
talk) 14:29, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep - Notable team which has participated in the Serbian Cup. IJA ( talk) 12:41, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- Though the club has indeed participated in qualification for the cup tournament, it has not participated in the tournament proper. Per WP:FOOTYN, "All teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) are assumed to meet WP:N criteria." As the club has not actually played in the national cup, they do not meet FOOTYN and therefore must meet GNG, which they do not. If every team which participated in qualification for a national cup tournament was considered to have participated in the cup, then every club on every level in every country which has a national cup would be notable as they all participate in qualification. — Jkudlick t c s 06:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA 1000 20:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA 1000 20:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - evidence leans to the fact that they have not played at the highest level. Bearian ( talk) 17:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
- 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.