Deletion of 2010 FIFA World Cup schedule

Comment: The schedule of that event seems notable - it has been covered in reliable sources. We're not short on disk space. Of course, it could be improved - or indeed done in other ways (template, whatever) - but I simply see no harm in referenced notable info on the project. I don't think the ''topic'' fails , because of the coverage elsewhere. I agree forks can be a bad thing, but in this specific inst. I could see it potentially becoming a decent article in itself
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIR)

Comment: pointless content |fork. Article carries little substantial information
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK)

Comment: I'm surprised that no one, myself included, has thought to look at the actual |guideline concerning forking. It states: ''Content forks that are created unintentionally result in redundant or conflicting articles and are to be avoided. As an article grows, editors often create Summary style spin-offs or new, linked article for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage.'' The way I interpret this is having spin-off articles on the matches is okay, but having more than one spin-off article on any given match is not, the final being obvious exception since there is much more coverage on that match than any of the others. So I would suggest is we either merge the group and knockout round articles into this one, which would make this article very bloated as well, or we simply get rid of this one
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)