Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grand Rapids FC

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 keep. (non-admin closure) ansh 666 04:27, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Rapids FC

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

Club has not played in the national cup and is not in a WP:FPL, thus fails WP:FOOTYN. Club has not garnered significant coverage to meet requirements of WP:N. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 16:16, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 16:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 16:18, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 16:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I still believe that playing in the 4th tier of US soccer is notable, but the community disagrees, and so I have to go with that. No evidence this club meets GNG either. Giant Snowman 18:16, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I also believe clubs playing in the fourth tier are notable. GiantSnowman, I don't see a single AfD with a 4–3 outcome in favour of deletion as being community consensus (I hadn't seen that AfD but would have !voted to keep). Number 5 7 12:49, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to point out that WP:AFD explicitly states that "[c]onsensus is not based on a tally of votes, but on reasonable, logical, policy-based arguments." Stating that the aforementioned AfD was decided on a 4-3 "vote" is incorrect. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 12:39, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This club is notable in this country, as it was the ranked second in attendance last season among fourth or lower tier clubs. This club was even mentioned on the MLS website last year. [1] And if participation in the national cup is a criteria for keeping it, it is only a matter of time before this team qualifies. 50.200.180.3 (talk) 14:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your last point is WP:CRYSTAL. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 12:28, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This point is that this team is eligible to participate in the national cup. The guideline WP:FOOTYN states that if a team is not eligible it should be removed, but this team is now eligible. 50.200.180.3 (talk) 16:00, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This team has received regular media coverage in the Grand Rapids area and has a lot of interest. Also, the attendance of this club would have ranked #8 in the third tier last season (2015 USL season attendance) and #9 in the second tier (2015 NASL season attendance). Regardless of what level on the pyramid this team is, we should keep this article because this is a club people care about and are likely to look up on Wikipedia. Rungladwin (talk) 21:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Grand Rapids FC (unlike the Canadian team that User:GiantSnowman notes above) is eligible to play in the U.S. Open Cup.Nfitz (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There are three related AfDs peding. It may make sense to relist or consolidate them in order to ensure a more consistent treatment. The others are: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AFC Ann Arbor and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oakland United FC.

Each article is different. This team is eligible for the U.S. Open Cup - I'm not sure Oakland is. Leave separate. Nfitz (talk) 06:39, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 20:11, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It appears as though the only teams from the National Premier Soccer League that are nominated for deletion are Grand Rapids FC and AFC Ann Arbor. Teams in NPSL are eligible for qualification into the U.S. Open Cup so I thought we were suppose to keep these pages. 50.200.180.3 (talk) 18:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:FOOTYN, teams which have played in the national cup tournament have presumed notability. Just being eligible does not provide notability. — Jkudlick ^tc_s 14:59, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Number 57 Fourth Division of US soccer are notable a single AFD is not a barometer further this club is eligible to play in the U.S. Open Cup.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:13, 17 November 2015 (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.