- 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 no consensus. Per WP:NPASR. (non-admin closure) — UY Scuti Talk 18:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Everton in the Community
- Everton in the Community ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No justification for a separate article DGG ( talk ) 01:11, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:42, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Everton in the Community, like similar activities of other clubs, concerns many different sports and activities besides football, like the representation of ten athlets in international games and two athlets in 2012 paralympic games and many other achievements and awards. Tables for the athlets and other information not related to the main article of football. Contrary to the article Everton L.F.C. which is separately from the Everton F.C., Everton in the Community is a stub. There are many things to enrich the article. Considering the above, I think the issue for which talks article should be developed separately. -- IM-yb ( talk) 01:51, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Except what I wrote above, please explain which parts of Wikipedia policy falls this article. -- IM-yb ( talk) 02:39, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Good sources. Seems alright, and like a separate entity from the football club. Even though its website is a subpage of the football club's site - http://www.evertonfc.com/community for the record. Certainly don't delete without merging its content into the football club at least, if it has to be done. Elzbenz ( talk) 08:56, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. It is a content fork and the topic isn't notable in and of itself. Szzuk ( talk) 21:25, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- The text does not have the correct device. I corrected it. About notable, some of the reports about awards and player appearances in international competitions and paralympics, activities who leading to built free school with right by the government, important work for community generally (according to the sources, BBC and others) is think enough for me. It surprised me that nobody talks about merger. All says only about "keep" or "delete". -- IM-yb ( talk) 00:35, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 03:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 16:15, 13 January 2016 (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.