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 as per consensus. Non-admin closure. Warrah (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2011 AFC Champions League (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

AFC did not ratify the qualification scheme for the AFC 2011 and 2012, so the whole article is nonsense. It should not be appeared. Raymond "Giggs" Ko 18:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, fact is, 2011 AFC Champions League will happen, simply use the page to discuss. and tweak it.

It's true that a new assement ranking is in the making, and maybe this page should be used to show this in detail? But i do think this page is needed as leagues in West Asia are nearing a completion pretty soon. For example, in Saudi Arabi, the league's top clubs have pratically sealed qualification already and would be added to the list very soon.

More detail should be given to this for example http://www.the-afc.com/en/inside-afc/676-afc-news/26193-criteria-approved-for-future-afc-club-events and http://www.the-afc.com/en/inside-afc/676-afc-news/26192-12-mas-keen-to-join-acl These should be added somewhere to show the development of the game and then it can be concluded if they made it or not. Druryfire (talk) 12:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC) UPD: I have rewritten it aswell :) Druryfire (talk) 17:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. The article is about the annual event, not its qualification scheme. I agree that it's absolute nonsense to state "The ACL 2011 will have the same format as the AFC Champions League 2009. Below is the preliminary qualification scheme for the AFC 2011, which the AFC released in 2008." so the article should be rewritten. But rewritten, not deleted. —WiJG? 15:18, 5 January 2010 (UTC) UPD: I have rewritten it. —WiJG? 16:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would also have to agree, however taking a partially different stance. Staying true to Wikipedia's definition, i believe that this page should only contain factual information that can be accurately sourced by the AFC, FIFA or a third party source. With that in mind, any and all speculative material should be removed with a barebones template remaining until further information has been released. - Kasperone (talk) 21:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kasperone, if you take a look at the article, you will notice that everything has been sourced. The article is now fine in my opinion. Druryfire (talk) 10:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. With the possible exception of BLPs, containing incorrect information is not grounds for deletion. The article is sourced so we can assume the information contained here is correct until we're told otherwise, and of course the tournament is definitely going ahead so there's no danger of crystalballery here.

• Keep article is about a notable, future competition that is likely to occur. May need some editing, but does not merit deletion. Eldumpo (talk) 20:51, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Teams are currenly playing to qualify for this tournament. It was created 15 months after 2010 AFC Champions League and no one complained about that in September 2008! Nfitz (talk) 02:21, 10 January 2010 (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.