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. Nominated by a confirmed, blocked sockpuppet, with no delete votes (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 15:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Angelniemen Ankkuri[edit]

[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)

~~Non notable club. Only a handful of hits on google. The only claim to notability is winning a couple of relays, and that too only once 40 years ago. 2Joules (talk) 07:32, 2 July 2018 (UTC)~~ striking confirmed, blocked sockpuppet nominator Atlantic306 (talk) 15:26, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly 20 years ago it won the Venla relay. What criteria should you follow for relevance for sports clubs on enwiki? --Per W (talk) 07:44, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~:::@User:Per W, WP:GNG requires non trivial coverage in multiple, independent, third party sources, that are reliable enough. 2Joules (talk) 07:46, 2 July 2018 (UTC)~~[reply]

OK, I will look in a book about Jukola relay and see how often Angelniemen Ankkuri appears there. There are at least eight orienteers with an English article that have competed for Angelniemen Ankkuri. I looked for more concrete guidelines as (Google Translate makes a reasonable job.) According to that Angelniemen Ankkuri is relevant. Per W (talk) 08:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:42, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:42, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:42, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~@User:Per W English wikipedia has stricter and somewhat different policies. You should familiarize yourself with WP:GNG. 2Joules (talk) 09:00, 2 July 2018 (UTC)~~[reply]

WP:GNG has a general definition, whereas sv:Wikipedia:Att_skriva_om_sport#Idrottsföreningar is more specific. Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) is somewhat between them. I have added one reliable, independent source that covers the club. There should be more sources available. Per W (talk) 11:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:::@User:Per W Only Reliable sources that fall under WP:RS can be used. Your edit did nothing to improve the article. Perhaps you can focus on other articles of similar nature that need improvement? Instead of this one, which seems destined for deletion. 2Joules (talk) 11:54, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@User:2Joules Why is not a newspaper a reliable source? Also the article tells that the chairman of the board of the Finnish orienteering federation attended the 70th anniversary of the club. Per W (talk) 12:12, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~:::::@User:Per W not all newspapers are reliable sources. This one fails WP:RS standards. 2Joules (talk) 12:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)~~[reply]

@User:2Joules Which standards are not fulfilled? Per W (talk) 12:21, 4 July 2018 (UTC) BTW, did you look at sv:Wikipedia:Att_skriva_om_sport#Idrottsföreningar? Per W (talk) 12:39, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:::::::@User:Per W It is not my duty to explain everything to you again and again. However, I will make an effort. Listen carefully please. The standards of inclusion and the requirements for getting an article are different on wikipedias of different languages. Something that is acceptable on Svensk wikipedia can be considered forbidden on the English wikipedia. Generally English wikipedia has higher standards, no offence meant. You cannot argue on English wikipedia using policies of another language wikipedia, so you should not direct me to another language wikipedia and thier policies when I am directing to policies of the English wikipedia. Last but not least, you should familiarize yourself with English wikipedia policies before debating AFD's. As you are very new, you should spend some time editing and creating content before you come to AFD. 2Joules (talk) 12:55, 4 July 2018 (UTC) @User:2Joules Now I divide the issues that we discuss (if you do not understand something, please ask me, since English is not my mother tongue):[reply]

Different policies on different language wikipedias: I agree that there are different standards and recommendations and I will follow the ones given for enwiki. You claim that enwiki is stricter. In what sense?
Different levels of specifications: The Swedish guide sv:Wikipedia:Att_skriva_om_sport#Idrottsföreningar (whose Google-translation is reasonable good, ) is more specific for sport clubs, whereas WP:GNG is very generic. (I have read it and think that it is a good general rule, although some more examples would be fine.) I can't see a big difference in the notability requirements between enwiki and svwiki, they are only expressed in different ways. What do you think about the Swedish guide?
fi:Salon Seudun Sanomat as a source: You claimed that it is not reliable. Could you explain why? What kind of sources do you require?
Why do you consider that this article seems destined for deletion? Which reason in Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion is valid? Have you considered alternatives?

I checked a Swedish newspaper archive and Angelniemen Ankkuri appears nearly every year since the 1990s due to good results in Sweden. So the club is notable. Per W (talk) 11:38, 5 July 2018 (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.