Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Association football world champions

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Association football world champions

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

Association football world champions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:REDUNDANT as all the information is already covered at FIFA World Cup. This also appears to be a very poor translation from a foreign language article. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as above, and does not merit being turned into a redirect. GiantSnowman 17:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete reduntant Yetanothermortal (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree with the deletion arguments Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete poorly made fork. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - although it's hard to tell as it's so badly written, this article seems mainly to be a coatrack to advance the claim that Uruguay are four-time world champions rather than the two times which most people recognise. Just no need for this article -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not needed, no improvement on existing articles mentioned in nom and Joseph2302 JW 1961 Talk 20:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep:the article is necessary and the sources irrefutable. If most people only know 2 Uruguayan titles it is because they are naive on the subject and it's been 100 years. See also: List of world champion football clubs, it's the same thing.I'm Italian, I'm not interested in pumping up Uruguay, I'm only interested in the historical truth about this encyclopedia. the new generations can never ignore the past.--Poppipos (talk) 21:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Poppipos: Please explain how this article is different to FIFA World Cup. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)**[reply]
      • It is different because the FIFA World Cup is a different competition from the Olympic football games, two competitions that assign the same title, that of world champion, but beware: only the Olympics of 24 and 28 have been recognized as assignees of the title of world champions, because they are played with FIFA regulations, all up to the creation of the FIFA World Cup event which since 1930 has assigned the world title. This happened after the IOC and FIFA had disagreements, the only 2 tournaments awarded the world title are THE WORLD CUP and the football Olympics of 24 and 28: because there was no world cup, the tournament was organized by FIFA with the IOC and the fear in the document that I put in the source n. 5 ear that FIFA recognizes these 2 tournaments as world cup (Origins of the World Cup) is very clear. In fact, at source n.6 we read this and in addition we read that FIFA authorizes Uruguay to bring 4 stars on the shirt (unique case) it has not authorized Italy to bring 5 stars or France 3 stars. Only uruguay. In the source n.1 there are period documents that attest to the 4 world titles to Uruguay. All this is not explained in the article concerning the world cup because it is a different event, such as the Intercontinental Cup and the world club championship, two different competitions that assign the same title, that of world club champion. sorry for my English.--Poppipos (talk) 21:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Surely already having this at Star (football badge)#International and Uruguay national football team#Team image is enough, without an article trying to argue the case in bad English? Uncle G (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sorry for my English, I thought I was better, sorry, I'm Italian, not a native speaker. I ask you if you can give me some help to improve this article--Poppipos (talk) 22:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why? We already have this at the three articles with proper subjects. Why do we need an entire new article with an odd title arguing the case through synthesis, starting from what Latin words mean? Uncle G (talk) 22:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • because in the other articles this is not explained. We only talk about the world cup, the statistics are important, without this article the new generations will believe that those titles are not world cup titles, and instead they are. It will be believed that the world titles start from 1930 while in truth they start from 1924--Poppipos (talk) 23:17, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Why did this require AfD? WP:CSD#A10 immediately comes to mind... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 05:16, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I could see an A10 being declined because it isn't exactly identical in terms of content and in terms of the point that the creator is trying to make about Uruguay. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 09:39, 8 April 2021 (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.