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.
Comment I'm so tempted to do a
WP:LIKE because I think the topic is fascinating. But that's an
WP:AADD so I'm not doing that. I'll just make a comment to the author: I hope this survives, but have no idea if policy supports this. If it doesn't, maybe you should have and could create an article about corporate sponsorship of sports teams in general, and then include a list. To everyone else, if such an article exists already, and this article doesn't survive AfD, I suggest you move the content to such an article.
CT55555 (
talk)
07:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep: It meets
WP:LISTPURP as a navigational list to provide information about clubs that are or have been sponsored in their name than otherwise. It also fulfils
WP:LSC by being clear about its objectives. If @
Hariboneagle927: is concerned that it is ambiguous, then that is not a good
WP:DEL-REASON. The better thing to do would be
WP:BOLD and change it to clarify (Which I would be happy to do if you'd like me to). @
CT55555: Would the policies at
WP:SAL assist you in that? @
Joseph2302:, It's not a NOTAD case, its just a collection of clubs that changed their name after a sponsor (works or economical). The C of E God Save the Queen! (
talk)11:26, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak Keep I don't consider myself well informed about when lists should or should not be created, but
User:The C of E linked to
WP:SAL and it seems to meet that criteria. I don't think the points about corporate owned teams is a reason to delete, as that is a different issue and also something that can be fixed if anyone wants to. I made a comment above, but it wasn't a "keep" so don't count my opinion twice please.
CT55555 (
talk)
15:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment if the list actually contained every sports team named after a sponsor, it would be unwieldy. Literally every professional cycling team is named after a sponsor, and they change sponsors every 1-2 seasons, so should all be listed. Which is exactly why this list should be seen as too broad and unencyclopedic. If you want to limit it to just association football clubs then that would be fine IMO, but sports teams will leave way too many teams and make the list unreadably long and pointless.
Joseph2302 (
talk)
12:55, 24 March 2022 (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.
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.
Comment I'm so tempted to do a
WP:LIKE because I think the topic is fascinating. But that's an
WP:AADD so I'm not doing that. I'll just make a comment to the author: I hope this survives, but have no idea if policy supports this. If it doesn't, maybe you should have and could create an article about corporate sponsorship of sports teams in general, and then include a list. To everyone else, if such an article exists already, and this article doesn't survive AfD, I suggest you move the content to such an article.
CT55555 (
talk)
07:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep: It meets
WP:LISTPURP as a navigational list to provide information about clubs that are or have been sponsored in their name than otherwise. It also fulfils
WP:LSC by being clear about its objectives. If @
Hariboneagle927: is concerned that it is ambiguous, then that is not a good
WP:DEL-REASON. The better thing to do would be
WP:BOLD and change it to clarify (Which I would be happy to do if you'd like me to). @
CT55555: Would the policies at
WP:SAL assist you in that? @
Joseph2302:, It's not a NOTAD case, its just a collection of clubs that changed their name after a sponsor (works or economical). The C of E God Save the Queen! (
talk)11:26, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Weak Keep I don't consider myself well informed about when lists should or should not be created, but
User:The C of E linked to
WP:SAL and it seems to meet that criteria. I don't think the points about corporate owned teams is a reason to delete, as that is a different issue and also something that can be fixed if anyone wants to. I made a comment above, but it wasn't a "keep" so don't count my opinion twice please.
CT55555 (
talk)
15:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment if the list actually contained every sports team named after a sponsor, it would be unwieldy. Literally every professional cycling team is named after a sponsor, and they change sponsors every 1-2 seasons, so should all be listed. Which is exactly why this list should be seen as too broad and unencyclopedic. If you want to limit it to just association football clubs then that would be fine IMO, but sports teams will leave way too many teams and make the list unreadably long and pointless.
Joseph2302 (
talk)
12:55, 24 March 2022 (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.