Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry statistics

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, pointless fork which tramples all over WP:NOT, much better dealt with via a link to this page [1] which is already there. Black Kite 18:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry statistics

Contested prod. Nothing more than a list of football (soccer) results between two rival teams, of non-encyclopaedic value and fails Wikipedia is not a list of statistics. A summary is already present in the article Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry. Qwghlm (talk) 00:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I believe that delete is the only option. Qwghlm (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This article assumes that every single match between the two clubs is notable. They're not. Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk) 00:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Essentially a fork of Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry. Since the rivalry has only taken on real significance in the last decade or so, I'm not sure I see the value in knowing evey last result from the last 100 years. The summary in the main article seems sufficient to me. If Sthenel objected to the removal of this content from the main article, it would have been better to revert or discuss rather than cut & paste into a new article. PC78 (talk) 01:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge content/redirect. It would be better suited on the other end of the fork. Not a neccesary deletion per say. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 01:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:INFO BanRay 10:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 10:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per PC78. Comment Of all the inter-London football rivalries, Arsenal and Chelsea is one of the least combustible - artificially inflated within recent years, maybe. There's a bit of a "Life didn't exist before 1999" going on here...Plutonium27 (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge wikipedia is not for statistics *quote appropriate wiki-rule herè* Some of the content is probably still worth merging though. --Camaeron (talk) 22:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge A lot of work went into this and it is important to Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry. Merge them. Mm40 (talk) 20:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Just to clarify, the entire content of this article was present in Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry until it was recently removed (see this diff). PC78 (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment. Is it really necessary to have every single match listed? Seems like WP:NOT#INFO to me. Surely we should follow the example set by North London derby, Steel City derby et al, and have a summary and then just list the most recent and/or most notable matches. Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk) 15:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry and just make a table for matches historically. matt91486 (talk) 16:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Keep to Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry but do not delete , good collection , appreciable work . Pearll's sun (talk) 01:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep after finding appropriate citations. A cleaner presentation would be much preferable, but I do not see the violation of WP:NOT applies here if there is a demonstration of the notability of the Arsenal-Chelsea rivalry (before I forget, WP:INFO redirects to a list of templates). An acceptable alternative is to merge with Arsenal and Chelsea rivalry. B.Wind (talk) 18:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and talk - this page is a content fork created after an edit dispute between Qwghlm and Sthenel. I am not !voting merge because that would mean pressing content on the editors of the main article. This is an old-fashioned edit dispute that can only be settled on the main article talk page. BlueValour (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- - - im supporting for the above two comments , keeping and fixing too would work if merge isnt applicable . but delete isnt justified . Pearll's sun (talk) 10:56, 22 March 2008 (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.