Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London City F.C.

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--Ymblanter (talk) 06:50, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

London City F.C.[edit]

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

A minor startup club without evidence of notability. The references are the club's own site and a page which doesn't even mention the club. I actually think the article might be speedily deleted under WP:CSD#A7, but I decided to give a chance for evidence of notability to be provided. (A PROD was removed by the creator of teh article without any reason being given.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete What stands out to me is this: "The club has expressed interest in obtaining a licence to play in the FA Women's Super League". So this to me meets WP:CRYSTAL, as yes they exist, but not currently at a level that would meet WP:NFOOT. If the team does become part of the Women's Super League, of course at that time they would be notable. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:28, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citation from The FA regarding 2016/2017 participation has been provided Jaydbutler 15:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I tagged it as lacking notability in the hope that something notable might surface, but nothing has. The comment above from Jaydbutler suggests that the reasoning behind this deletion discussion is unclear to the author. Please read WP:GNG for more detailed guidance, and/or WP:NFOOT as suggested above. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 18:33, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly fails the accepted notability guideline for clubs of having played in a national league or cup. Article can be restored if/when the club ever achieves its stated aims. Number 5 7 22:41, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non notable club. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 06:37, 28 June 2016 (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.