Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FA Premier League satellite decoder case

: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 redirect to English football on television. As the merge has happened, I'll close this as a redirect to allow the script to do its magic Ged UK 11:15, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

=[[FA Premier League satellite decoder case]]=

:{{la|FA Premier League satellite decoder case}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FA Premier League satellite decoder case}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{Find sources|FA Premier League satellite decoder case}})

Not notable – this comes under WP:NOT#NEWS. —Half Price 14:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. —Half Price 14:28, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Delete as per nominator - this is not encyclopedic content. Giant Snowman 15:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

:*Merge as below - probably worth a mention, but does not merit a seperate article. Giant Snowman 14:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Keep. There has been substantial coverage of the case over the last few years.[http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/oct/05/premier-league-european-court-of-justice][http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11452434][http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6594775.stm][http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news.ma/article/55114][http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article4204119.ece][http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7155939.stm] Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:52, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Weak keep. Superseded by comment below This article needs a lot of work, and I'm not entirely convinced it meets WP:EVENT's requirement of lasting impact, but with the length and depth of coverage found by Jmorrison it's close to falling under the realms of "historical significance" required by the guidline. Could we merge it somewhere and retain the history so it could be recreated if it has lasting impact? Alzarian16 (talk) 16:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Keep/Merge? seems to be significant notability via the sources, but not sure if a stand-alone article is necessary. Would it work if moved to a relevant section at English football on television or an equivalent page? Eldumpo (talk) 11:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

:*Support: I agree with your merge idea. —Half Price 11:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

:*Support the merge to English football on television. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

:*Merge Support merge. It is a documented legal case and has merit. It shouldn't be lost.--Egghead06 (talk) 15:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

:*Support. Looks like as good as destination as any. As I said above, we can always recreate if it becomes more notable. Alzarian16 (talk) 21:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

:*Support. Merge to English football on television. Argyle 4 Life^talk 20:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

:*This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 09:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment: I have gone ahead with merge so that this discussion can hopefully be closed. —Half Price 15:04, 26 October 2010 (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.