Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012–13 UEFA Champions League

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 keep. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 05:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

2012–13 UEFA Champions League

2012–13 UEFA Champions League (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Contains absolutely no information specific to the assumed 2012-13 event, based entirely on the unsourced assumption that it will be conducted on the same basis as at present. Kevin McE (talk) 22:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

As of today, the article has some validity: today specific facts about this edition became known. While I maintain that the article until now merited deletion, there is now something to justify its existence. Kevin McE (talk) 21:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Motion to close debate Given the confirmation of the final venue, I suggest we close the debate and keep the article, so as to remove the AfD infobox from the page. Any discussion on what information to keep in the article will then be taken to the talk page of the article. Chanheigeorge (talk) 01:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

• Keep - Article is based on earlier articles but may change if the organization changes how it is run. The article is easily changed in that case. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 00:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• Comment - all speculative material should be removed, per WP:CRYSTAL, especially if said information is, as the nominator implies, also factually incorrect. GiantSnowman 00:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

• Keep - but then if that's done, I'm happy for the article to be kept. GiantSnowman 12:58, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The information is not factually incorrect. There will be a 2012-13 Champions League, and the co-efficients will be what is shown. The only thing that may change is the overall format, and that is shown to just be the norm, not the guarantee. While predictions do violate CRYSTAL, what is in the article is just a summary of the most likely layout based on previous years, and the official websites of each participant entity. Sellyme^Talk 13:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

• Question regarding the text in the yellow box: Is UEFA really expected to define a completely new scheme of qualifying rounds and teams allocation? Country coefficients of seasons 2006–07 through 2010–11 should determine what country will qualify how many teams to which stage of the competition concerned - for example Ukraine will qualify its champion for the group stage and its runner-up for the third qualifying round. This period is over, so those coefficients can't change any more. All the information that is there in the article is based on them. And season 2011–12 (or 2011 in some countries like Norway) will determine which those teams will actually be - for example if Dynamo become Ukrainian champions, they will enter the group stage, and if Shakhtar finish second, they will enter the third qualifying round. Season 2011–12 commences as soon as a couple of months' time form now; and in those countries (like Norway) whose championships run from spring to autumn it is even nearly halfway finished. So a Norwegian team is now competing in their Premier League and knows that it has to occupy a given position there in order to qualify for a given stage of the CL, but is UEFA still to redefine this scheme and the team's objectives far after the start of their league season? --Theurgist (talk) 01:15, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. Seems to be a clear-cut example of why WP:CRYSTAL was written. All the information is what is presumed will happen, with no references verifying it that this will actually be the case. The article can easily be recreated when reliable sources on the 2012–13 tournament come into existence. Jenks24 (talk) 06:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• Delete - It's fairly certain that this event will take place, but there have been no details confirmed about it yet and this article is based on conjecture that the tournament will follow the same structure as previous seasons. It's all guesswork, and like User:Jenks24 says, this is what WP:CRYSTAL was made for. – PeeJay 13:36, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:CRYSTAL. The article can be easily recreated when concrete information becomes available. Argyle 4 Life^talk 16:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• Comment - The issue here is that you can't reference an overwhelming absence of something. i.e. any indication of significant change. The only news we have heard about changes to the format UEFA competitions is that there will be 6 cup winners entering the group stage of the Europa League. As I understand it, the regulations for 2012-13 have been approved but unpublished. If that is the most mentionable piece of news to come out UEFA (or any news outlet) then I believe that both the Champions League and Europa League pages are justified in copying the format of previous years, but with the proviso note that there may be some alterations. I feel that the information is encyclopedically worthy.

However, technically I can't argue with the grounds for a drastic reduction in the page content (fully deleting it is excessive). As I say, there isn't a way to generally reference a complete lack of news as a justification for keeping the full page. And yes, it is possible that there has been a major overhaul of the competition which hasn't been announced or reported at all in footballing circles. Therefore I fear the page will be shortened for a few weeks until the new regulations are published. Aheyfromhome (talk) 20:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

• Comment Can't we simply redirect this to UEFA Champions League? Deletion does seem over the top when the content will simply be recreated in a few weeks. Redirecting will allow the content to quickly and easily be retrieved. Valenciano (talk) 21:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
• Keep Perhaps I can agree with the fact that we should not conjecture about the format (even though it is very likely to be the same). But as Theurgist said, the country coefficients have now been fully computed and the ranking of the associations fully established (maybe then somebody may argue that UEFA can just ditch the coefficients?). So this is certainly some information relevant to the competition. The change in the number of spots, e.g. Germany will gain a spot and Italy will lose a spot, are also widely reported in media (see [1] for example). So the article as a whole has already passed the test of having verifiable information already available as sources. So if the contention is WP:CRYSTAL, then we should just delete the format, not the whole article. Chanheigeorge (talk) 08:58, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
• Keep It's a perfectly reasonable article, is linked to from tonnes of 2011-12 league pages, and is in no way WP:CRYSTAL. It is not Crystal-balling to presume an annual event will continue to be annual in the absence of extenuating circumstances. In any case, most official European league pages have a "Qualification to ..." in their league standings, and that clearly counts as a reliable source. Sellyme^Talk 09:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
• Comment: CRYSTAL is related to articles about things that may or may not be. Here are the facts: 1) This event will happen. 2) We don't know the format so that material is speculative, but highly probable. Cyrstal specifically states: "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place" and does not prohibit this type of article because it will take place. Instead of referencing it, read it and quote where this article is prohibited by it. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
  • In short, WP CRYSTAL does not apply to the article about this event. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• Keep There is already relevant information, because the allocation of places is based on the rankings for the 5 seasons to 2011. It will happen unless (i) the world ends, in which case we won't be any better off for having deleted the article or (ii) European football is hit by a scandal of incomprehensible magnitude, in which case their will probably be lots to say in the article. This sort of nomination displays a reckless disregard for wikipedia's need to recruit and retain editors. How would you like it if you created content in good faith which is realistically certain to exist in wikipedia in a year's time, and it was deleted on a technicality, and you were told to do it all again next year? You might react by quitting for good. Wikipedia cannot afford to alienate editors in that way: the board of wikimedia issued a statement a while back stating that the declining number of editors was the project's biggest problem, and this nomination is a text book example of how to alienate people and make the problem worse. Alex Middleton (talk) 00:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
• Keep I don't see the logic of deleting this page to see it come back in a few months when the new football season starts. Normally someone will make a page of next seasons competition whilst the current one is ongoing. I know this one has jumped the gun, but it would be silly to delete this now. I hear too a decision on the 2013 final venue is due tomorrow (Thursday 16 June 2011) so its not as if this has no information to go off. Stevo1000 (talk) 19:11, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• Keep - I certainly don't think WP:CRYSTAL applies here as it's certain this will go ahead (barring the outbreak of World War 3!) - in fact, they're deciding the venue for the final later today. Any incorrect information regarding competition format can be corrected or removed quite easily. —BETTIA— ^talk 11:42, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
• Keep I think the fact that UEFA have already confirmed where the final will be taking place would suggest that it's not likely that the event will be cancelled. OK, the co-efficiants may move the countries around but I don't think they have any major structural changes planned. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

keep - Wembley was confirmed for the 1-fittyth anniversary so this binness has specific inf'mations to 2012-13 fo sho. Stop yo plainin and let the article stay. Check the article on Soccernet dawg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.128.194.205 (talk) 19:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

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.