Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1985–86 Real Madrid CF season

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 speedy keep. No evidence of copyvio. Wasting people's time. —Dark 01:56, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1985–86 Real Madrid CF season

[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)

Season-article without any sources for the season (matches) itself. Suspicion of copyvio due to unsourced copying. The Banner talk 09:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. The Banner talk 09:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this article meets WP:NSEASONS requirements since three years ago. Also, nomination is flawed, biased, and with false claims of being unsourced even when everybody who reads the article can verify it that is properly sourced with several references. I wrote the article three years ago and I've never received this false-based nominations by the same user who is clearly not acting in good faith. He nominated to delete my 10 articles with false claims of being unsourced and not reaching any consensus with the same user voting in every AfD. It is unbelievable consensus against my articles is 1-0 in the 10 Afd discussions. The decision to nominate was inconsistent with the treatment of the articles for all NSEASONS and as such appears capricious in nature. The article should be published status without delay.HugoAcosta9 (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- It would be a good start when you start reading the nomination to see what I really said. The Banner talk 15:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  It would be a good start for you to read anti-Apartheid books when you start the massive nomination against a Mexican editor of 15 articles and falsely claiming are unsourced. HugoAcosta9 (talk) 15:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:09, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seasons for one of the most prominent and successful sports teams in the history of the world are highly notable, and the nom cannot possibly have satisfied WP:BEFORE; I would be surprised to find fewer than hundreds of reliable sources covering this season. We'd trout slap a newbie making multiple AfD nominations this bad; for a highly experienced editor whose infoboxes indicate an understanding of sport, this is utterly unacceptable. Deletion is not cleanup. Given numerous other wretched nominations -- all targeting similar season articles created by User:HugoAcosta9 -- it's hard not to have some sympathy for HugoAcosta9's argument at ANI today that there's some ulterior motive or animus at work. Ravenswing 23:39, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with your !vote, but you kind of lost me there towards the end. I don't see any reason to suggest there's ulterior motives here. These articles are all very similar in make up - chunks of unsourced prose combined with a ton of tables that read more like a stats database run by ESPN than an encyclopedia article. And many of the first wave of nominations ended in deletion or relists. I'm not familiar enough with the sports guidelines to weigh in officially, but I can certainly see where a nomination would come from from a quick skim of things at least. Sergecross73 msg me 00:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mm, except for a few factors: first, there's WP:BEFORE. "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD." The scope and impact of a Real Madrid is worldwide, and finding dozens and hundreds of sources is so ludicrously easy as to guarantee that the nom made no attempt to do so ... and the nom is required to make the attempt prior to filing.
Secondly, attempts to delete related articles for such a club is barely credible for someone completely ignorant of sports. It would rather be like an American seeking to delete articles related to the New York Yankees; even someone disinterested in sports is aware of the Yankees and their impact on sport. Then you have the copyvio accusation, which is barren of actual evidence and frankly is pretty specious.
User:The Banner should not be coming off like an ignorant newbie with a couple hundred edits. They have over a hundred thousand edits and sixteen years of service. Infoboxes on their page set forth a familiarity with sport, and a native European ought to be relatively familiar with the subject. Nor do we have someone unfamiliar with AfD; User:The Banner has made well over a thousand noms over the years. So I leave it to you which version you prefer: that this highly experienced editor is somehow incompetent and careless when it comes to AfD, or that there's some other cause at work. Ravenswing 10:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - obviously the article could be improved (a bit more prose would be good) but this is an article about a season when a globally-renowned team won the championship of one of the top leagues in the world in the most popular sport in the world. So obviously notable I don't know why we are wasting our time here...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This is a silly nomination as the article covers a season where the club won its domestic championship and the European cup (a highly successful one even by Real Madrid's standards!). There is plenty of coverage of the season such as [1] and [2]. The nominator really ought to search more thoroughly before making nominations like this (or ask for help from experienced editors). Jogurney (talk) 15:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - ludicrous nomination. Prominent sports team, playing in Spain's top football division - and the sources are there to support that. Might need improving, but not deleting. Giant Snowman 18:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, passes NSEASON.--Ortizesp (talk) 21:10, 20 October 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.