- 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 redirect to AFL Britain. Fails WP:GNG (non-admin closure) Dat Guy Talk Contribs 18:50, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Wimbledon Hawks
- Wimbledon Hawks ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG, hasn't been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources. Hack ( talk) 03:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to AFL Britain unless someone else can find some significant coverage. Jenks24 ( talk) 09:41, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- i have added further references — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonehill ( talk • contribs) 11:06, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep I am the social media manager for the wimbledon hawks and I believe I have adding in numerous reliable sources now (including the Guardian and other local newspapers, plus multiple websites) and spent a fair amount of time bringing this up to standards
Jasonehill (
talk) 15:42, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- Please bear in mind WP:COI - The Bushranger One ping only 00:43, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 18:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 18:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 19:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 19:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 19:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect. At the start of the afd the article had no refs at all, now it has dozens. Unfortunately none demonstrate the club is notable. The club wouldn't be notable if it was in Australia, let alone the UK. Szzuk ( talk) 22:28, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep satisfies GNG since additions of references and feature in one of the top leagues in England.
Flickerd (
talk) 06:10, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
- "feature in one of the top leagues in England" is a bit of a red herring. Yes, they apparently play in the highest level Aussie Rules league in England, but Aussie Rules is a such an incredibly minor sport in the UK that I would imagine 99.999% of the UK population don't even know it exists. It's a bit like referring to the top cricket league in Mexico..... -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 08:39, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Keepunderstand the point on conflict of interest from myself but to say the club isn't notable would be a slight over exaggeration. Would it not be notable if a Australian club was producing players playing at International level in sport and playing in the top domestic league in the UK? The references, including national newspaper coverage, should point to the fact that it is notable in the sense? Jasonehill ( talk) 10:52, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
- comment I don't think the above criteria should be a determination of notability, especially TV coverage, it doesn't mean the club lacks notability, there may just not be a market for it; under the same argument a lot of teams within the top state competitions in Australia wouldn't meet notability, that's why it's better to follow
WP:GNG (which overrides Nsports anyway).
Flickerd (
talk) 03:10, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not going to disagree with you. That was of course a leading question because I already know the club has virtually no spectators and has probably never featured on television and never will - but it does point to a pretty big problem...this club doesn't pass NSports and so we're onto does this really pass GNG? Can you explain which of the references give this a pass on GNG because I'm not seeing it? They all look primary, trivial or of a routine nature. Szzuk ( talk) 18:27, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- comment I don't think the above criteria should be a determination of notability, especially TV coverage, it doesn't mean the club lacks notability, there may just not be a market for it; under the same argument a lot of teams within the top state competitions in Australia wouldn't meet notability, that's why it's better to follow
WP:GNG (which overrides Nsports anyway).
Flickerd (
talk) 03:10, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect to either AFL Britain or Australian rules football in England#Leagues and Clubs, both are reasonable targets and I'm not sure which would be preferable. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:41, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
- Redirect -- the latter is probably the better target. As far as I am aware Aussie-rules football is an amateur sport in England, so that we should not have articles in individual clubs. The lack of blue-links in the table of personnel strengthens my view. Peterkingiron ( talk) 15:44, 27 December 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.