Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013 Cyprus Cup squads

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Cyprus Cup squads

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

Contested PROD. List of players, with no prose. Fails WP:NOTSTATS and bordering on WP:LISTCRUFT. Similar to a previous AfD - 2014 Granatkin Memorial squads JMHamo (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. JMHamo (talk) 23:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cyprus-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this tournament does not merit a separate article for squads. Giant Snowman 12:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - NOTSTATS failure for an invitational tournament. No indication that the squads taking part received significant reliable coverage as a subject themselves to warrant a separate article. Fenix down (talk) 13:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Article needs expansion not deletion. Also meets WP:GNG. The nominator's cited recent deletion discussion is about a youth tournament. This is a tournament for senior national teams with references citing notability. Can the nominator clarify how WP:Stats is relevant? Hmlarson (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean WP:NOTSTATS - It's in relation to lists, the fact that they are male or female, junior or senior has absolutely no relevance. JMHamo (talk) 22:16, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which number of WP:NOTSTATS are you referring to? This article is not #1) a summary-only description of works nor #2) a lyrics database #3) a long and sprawling list of statistics nor #4) an exhaustive log of software updates - so what criteria are you using here? Also, why is this being treated any different than these 2010 FIFA World Cup squads, UEFA Euro 2008 squads, or any of the numerous similar articles on Wikipedia? Hmlarson (talk) 19:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Number 3, the list of players without any sourced prose is just a statistic of the competition. Additionally, the other pages you mention are for official FIFA competitions, not for invitational friendly competitions. You will see from the link above, this and from the this that there is a degree of consensus forming that minor international tournaments do not need squad listings that are inherently taken entirely from primary sources. Fenix down (talk) 08:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of statistic according to Google: "a fact or piece of data from a study of a large quantity of numerical data." A squad listing is not numerical data and WP:NOTSTATS doesn't apply here. WP:GNG does. Hmlarson (talk) 20:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Why? Where are the sources showing that the squads attracted any particular attention above and beyond that generated by the competition itself, bearing in mind that this is an invitational tournament, not an official FIFA event. Fenix down (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article has a number of references indicating notability of squads, individual players, etc. It can be improved with more. Hmlarson (talk) 18:39, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I see no reason to delete this article. It preserves in one place the names of all the players in a prominent international tournament of several of the best national women's soccer teams in the world. Given the sparse and lousy webpages for many women's soccer tournaments and teams, future historians of the beautiful game will thank us for preserving this information for ready reference. Smallchief (talk 21:24, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Wikipedia isn't a replacement for the lack of coverage of women's football in the main stream media (although the fact that the players here are female has absolutely nothing to do with this AfD). See WP:NOTWHOSWHO - Wikipedia does not constitute a primary source... JMHamo (talk) 22:09, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia preserves notable information, hopefully forever. Women soccer players in an international tournament are at least as notable as a vast number of people and groups who are covered on wikipedia. To survive, Wikipedia must, first and foremost, be useful -- and this article is useful to anyone interested in women's soccer. Me, for example. Smallchief (talk 22:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I must stress that this has nothing to do with women's football and shouldn't be thought of that way... Male or female isn't what this AfD is about so your comments are misguided. JMHamo (talk) 23:29, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is notable because it collects in one place a list of notable people -- women soccer players who represented their countries in a significant international tournament in 2013. A lot of articles in Wikipedia are a lot less notable than that. I notice, for example, that an article titled List of American beach volleyball players seems to be in good standing. I'm glad to see that article, as I am to see this one. Smallchief (talk 01:41, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Smallchief:, not sure you fully understands what this list article is trying to achieve. This is not a list of notable football players like the volleyball listing you noted above, this is a list of players who made up the squads who took part in one iteration of an invitation-only friendly football tournament, not the World Cup, not a continental FIFA tournament. I also note the majority of your comments revolve around WP:ILIKEIT and WP:INTERESTING, both of which are specifically noted as arguments to be avoided in AfD discussions. It would be helpful if you could review your comments in light of this and revise them pointing to specific guidelines that would support a keep !vote. Fenix down (talk) 08:54, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll repeat my arguments. (1) The article does no harm to anybody or anything; (2) The list of participants in a well-established, international soccer tournament involving some of the best women soccer players in the world is more notable that a vast number of existing Wikipedia articles; (3) The article is a useful reference, now and into the far future, for soccer fans and historians; (4) Most articles about soccer tournaments list only the goal scorers. This article lists also the midfielders, defenders, and goalies who are equally important players on a soccer team.

I wonder whether this article would be proposed for deletion if the tournament had taken place in the United States and involved the U.S. national team? Is this proposal to delete an example of "systemic bias" Smallchief (talk 10:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But your arguments are all ones specifically documented as arguments to be avoided. Agrument 1 is a prime example of WP:NOHARM, Argument 2 is a prime example of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, Argument 3 (aside from being inherently subjective) is a prime example of WP:VALINFO and Argument 4 isn't an argument at all, it does not refer to any form of notability guidelines. Squad listings can be notable, but this is a listing for an invitation-only friendly competition, not an official FIFA tournament. Your final comment regarding systematic bias is unfounded (and incorrect as I know several contributors here are not american) and also does not WP:AGF, you may wish to consider striking it. Fenix down (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you are striving for an exhaustive review of wikipedia guidelines, I suggest you also take into account Wikipedia: If it ain't broke, don't fix it "If there is no evidence of a real problem, and fixing the "problem" would not effectively improve Wikipedia, then don't waste time and energy (yours or anybody else's) trying to fix it." Smallchief (talk 14:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But it is broken, per WP:NOTSTATS as clearly outlined in the AfD rationale. As you have been repweatedly asked, please point to notability guidelines fulfilled by the article and reliable sources supporting it, please do not repeate "I like it / it's useful" arguements without such reference. Fenix down (talk) 14:33, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not my responsibility to persuade you that this article is notable. I'm happy with the status quo. You are the one who wants to upset the apple cart by deleting an article created more than one year ago, reviewed, accepted by the task force on women's soccer, viewed more than 2,000 times, and which has not accumulated a single complaint up until now. The onus is on you to argue persuasively that this subject is unworthy of a wikipedia article. Smallchief (talk 15:09, 17 March 2014 (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.