From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 00:58, 8 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Longridge Town F.C.

Longridge Town F.C. (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Football club that fails the accepted notability criteria of English clubs (having played in the FA Cup, FA Trophy or FA Vase, or at level 10 or above). Prod was removed without explanation and the false claim that the club has played in the FA Vase added afterwards, presumably to try and prevent deletion (see the 1982–83 FA Vase results – supposedly the season in which the club reached the first round – here. Number 5 7 20:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC) reply

  • Delete The FA Vase result is clearly one that can be attributed to one of the teams that amalgamated to form this club in 1996 making this club non notable Seasider91 ( talk) 22:14, 31 May 2016 (UTC) reply
    • @ Seasider91: It's not even that – the current club was formed by a merger of Longridge United and Longridge St. Wilfred’s, but neither of those clubs played in the FA Vase either. It's completely fictitious as far as I can see. Number 5 7 07:40, 1 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 06:10, 1 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 06:10, 1 June 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 18:55, 1 June 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as there's still questionability that this currently can be established as independently notable regardless of any apparent past winnings and such, delete until something better substantial is available. SwisterTwister talk 05:59, 7 June 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 14:11, 7 June 2016 (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.