Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parley Sports F.C.
Actually, the google evidence works AGAINST your arguement.  In order to be valid subject matter for a Wikipedia article, then the subject needs to have notability outside of Wikipedia.  Wikipedia is NOT a means to gain notability; it only documents subjects that have notability verified by reliable third party sources.  If a WikiPedia article turns up as the first hit on Google, it is usually a red flag that the WikiPedia article (and NOT an outside source as required by the WikiPedia policy against |original research) is the only major place to find this information.  As such, it should be deleted.  If you have evidence to the contrary, then IMPROVE THE ARTICLE.  |Calling experienced editors names or complaining that the club should be kept without providing hard facts will not work in your favor.  Also, proof of existance is NOT proof of notability.  The fact that a single local newspaper wrote about them does not mean that anyone outside of the immediate area has even heard of this club.  If they have, then PROVIDE REFERENCES to show that the club is widely known and regarded outside of the immediate Bournmouth/Dorset area.  If there is no such evidence, the article is not notable.  Even if they were the best level-15 club, that makes them like the 500th best club in England.  Again, my Church softball team is pretty good.  But it's not the New York Yankees or even the Toledo Mud Hens
— User:Jayron32, 20:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:NPA (Wikipedia:No original research)