Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edet FK

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edet FK

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is complex, but contemporary Sweden is not a case where sourcing is completely inaccessible, but I cannot find evidence that this merged team, extant since 2012, nor the constituent teams: Inlands IF Lilla Edets IF (which was fifth tier pre merger) are notable. I can find game reports, but nothing approaching N:ORG, or the GNG. Star Mississippi 19:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Sports, Football, and Sweden. Star Mississippi 19:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Formal inclusion of the below in the bundle for visibility Star Mississippi 20:02, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - low-level Swedish teams, no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 09:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is sourcing at Lilla Edets IF, however it appears that none of it has been merged to the primary article in your nomination, it could be possible just to merge the three together, You could have brought up this topic at WT:FOOTBALL to question whether the articles could be improved, but rarely do people go that route! I really question if this AfD is helpful. (WP:TNT and start again in my opinion) but I see your point. @GiantSnowman: You didn't sign your post above correctly. Govvy (talk) 12:25, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up! Giant Snowman 15:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense @Govvy, but it's unclear (to me) whether the merged team would be notable as such a low level team. Therefore a merger would kick the can down the road, but no objection of course if this is the outcome. Star Mississippi 01:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:21, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there are more opinions about possible Merge.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:16, 17 November 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.