Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brazil at the 2006 FIFA World Cup

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 all. No consensus to delete. Malinaccier (talk) 02:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil at the 2006 FIFA World Cup

The majority of the content of this article is a duplication of information from various articles (in this case,

Jay 12:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

)

)

This discussion has been included in
Jay 12:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete All this information really belongs on each countries national team article. Dan the Man1983 (talk) 13:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not even sure it belongs there. It's too much detail for the team's article, IMO. –
  Jay 14:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
- Agree with that, only a short paragraph or sentence belong on the teams article. Dan the Man1983 (talk) 14:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Giant Snowman 14:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have no objection to these specific pages being deleted, although I would rather see sensibly sized articles at, for example,
Trinidad and Tobago at the 2006 FIFA World Cup, and others like it or likely to follow it, which I presume would come into the firing line. I'll declare an interest: I made the page. When a small footballing nation, or one with a very modest history, has previously unimagined success, there is a temptation for sometimes excessive weighting of the article around one tournament, reaching extremes like Panama in the 2005 Gold Cup (since radically reduced). An article specific to the team's participation in an event can maintain proportionality in the parent article: I believe this has been successful in the T&T case. Kevin McE (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
- I have now included the T&T article in this nomination. –
  Jay 21:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  I think it would have been far more respectful to the notion of debate if you had addressed my reasons for keeping the article. On what grounds do you consider this small article not to be successful in avoiding disproportionate focus on one month in the main team article? Kevin McE (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  It would be unfair on all of the other nations' articles to nominate them for deletion but not the T&T one. IMO, this is an all-or-none issue. Either they all stay or they all go. –
  Jay 00:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  I can only note your apparent unwillingness to answer my question. Kevin McE (talk) 05:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I'm really not sure about this one, it seems too specific to have it's own article but then again many sports team have individual seasons articles and you have to wonder where else could you put this info?
talk) 19:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
- The thing about club teams having articles on individual seasons is that club teams play in numerous competitions each season. These articles, on the other hand, focus on national teams' involvement in just one competition. I mean, I'm sure one might object to there being an article on
  Jay 20:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Keep all Too much information for National Team articles. Encyclopedic information, the World Cup is the largest sporting event in the world, detailed analysis of a team's performance (like in the case of T&T, where it was the first ever qualification) does strike me as something Wikipedia should carry and is of interest.
talk) 21:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment - there are also current AfDs about national team seasons. Why not combine the information about the World Cup with friendlies in that season for a
matt91486 (talk) 19:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
There is precedent for the deletion of such articles. In my opinion, there is no need for such great detail about national teams' articles anyway. Even matches in clubs' seasons articles aren't covered in such detail. –
Jay 20:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Which articles are you referring to? The T&T one has match details 1 1/2 lines long. Too much detail is a matter for editing within the article, not deletion. Kevin McE (talk) 21:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Rasadam. --Ciao 90 (talk) 12:27, 5 June 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.