Deletion of Royal Marines A.F.C.

Comment: I'm thinking more of the "played in the FA Cup/Vase" side. While obviously I can't predict, it seems unlikely they'll vanish soon enough ''not'' to meet the FA Cup qualifying criteria reasonably soon, not that they'll choose not to enter the Cup/Vase. Maybe the comparison with FCUM or AFCW is an overstretch, but a comparison with F.C. Halifax Town for example (yes, I know they're a couple of steps below) or the early Aldershot Town F.C. before their promotion run seems fair, especially if a case for continuity can be made. As I've previously said, IMO the spirit of the "top ten steps" rule is to keep out pub sides, school teams etc, not "legitimate" teams that have yet to qualify for the FA Cup but are on course to do so. Don't get me wrong – I won't lose sleep if it's deleted – but there doesn't seem a point providing the article can be appropriately sourced if it's going to need to be recreated in a few months. ( is a policy whereas  is still just a guideline, after all, and it ''is'' a potentially useful article.)&nbsp;–&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:N)

Comment: as per suggestion above. Realistically, this team ''is'' almost certainly going to meet  within a couple of years, and it's pointless deleting something that's sourceable, verifiable, potentially useful and will probably need to be recreated. The spirit of the "top 10 steps of the pyramid only" guideline is to stop every pub and Sunday-league team from insisting on their own article. Unless I'm reading things wrong, this particular team is the military equivalent of FCUM or AFC Wimbledon and not a dozen squaddies having a kickabout in the park; I'd go so far as to say that if an appropriate merge target can't be found, this warrants an |IAR keep.&nbsp;–&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:FOOTYN||WP:IAR)