Deletion of 2002 FIFA World Cup statistics

Comment: all passes  and FIFA World Cup is more important than others but can consider merging the disciplinary articles to the main statistic articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS)

Comment: Article 3 of  says we can create a separate article for statistics, I think it means we should not have another page for disciplinary record. In my opinion, these information do not lack context or explanation, so they should be kept, and they usually are too massive to be merged into the main articles. Some other tournament articles which have less statistical details can include them and still be readable, but not FIFA World Cup and UEFA Euro ones, unless we choose to remove a major part of these information
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS)

Comment: I am straight down voting '''Keep''' for the statistics articles, however I think the disciplinary record articles are way too deep and excessive for wikipedia guidelines and inclined to go with '''delete''' per . Statistics pages should cover a fair amount of discipline information anyway
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS)

Comment: u|Ianblair23}} I often think some of these regular contributors of the football project vote with their heart. I often wonder if they bother reading the polices or not. For-instance {{u|Hhkohh}} saying keep because all the articles pass . Except that policy isn't a pass or fail policy, it's meant to explain what Wikipedia shouldn't have and can have. FIFA World Cup is considered a top rated subject and that would include the statistics so I would hardly call that an indiscriminate article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS)

Comment: but '''delete or merge disciplinary pages''' Sigh. These fail  as they stand. But I'm voting "keep" because ''data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources,'' and these pages ''could'' be improved to pass , especially the coaching sections. I don't think you can do that with the disciplinary stats, though. I used to buy specialised encyclopedias for this exact type of information, which is why I think it's both encyclopedic and improvable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS||WP:NOTSTATS)