Talk:NK Zavrč

Football Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Slovenia Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SloveniaWikipedia:WikiProject SloveniaTemplate:WikiProject SloveniaSlovenia articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Slovenia to-do list:

Here are some tasks you can do (watch):

Requests: , Protestant Reformation in the Slovene Lands (sl), Metlika black (sl)
Wikify: Russia–Slovenia relations
Unreferenced: Inner Carniola, Litostroj, Pavel Golia, Predjama Castle
Cleanup: Edvard Ravnikar, Škofja Loka, Inex-Adria Aviopromet Flight 1308
Expand: Education in Slovenia
Stubs: Ajdovi žganci, Čop Street, Radenska
NPOV: Gregorij Rožman, Siddharta (band)
Portal maintenance: Update News, Did you know, announcements, and suggest Selected article and picture
Help assess the quality of 35 unassessed articles
Take/Add requested photographs

NK Zavrč

This is a defunct club. All the sources show that. NK Zavrč, registered at NZS with number 728 does not exist any more. The society was even deleted from all registers in 20.02.2018. Football Association and all the entities aknowledge that and there are loads of sources that say NK Zavrč went bankrupt. DNŠ Zavrč that plays in the third is a new club that has absolutelly no connection to it.

We cannot make an exception for Zavrč just because the articles are stubs or because not many people care for it. We must use reliable sources and we must be consistent. If DNŠ does not pass GNG then we must wait until next year for them to pass. We cannot go ignoring the rules because we do not like the notability criteria for football clubs. If we follow sources for Mura, Šmartno and all the other clubs, why should we ignore all rules in the case of Zavrč? That would be just pure POV pushing. 23:00, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Create 4 different articles then if you want to create a new stub article everytime they re-register, first the article for the original 1969 club, then the second club that was registered during the 1970s ("Portoroški sklepi" rule in Slovenia, when all sports clubs needed to be re-registered as legally new entities), then another article for the club founded in 1998 (the club didnt exist between 1985 and 1998), and finally the fourth article for the 2016 club. See this for example, it says that the club was founded in 1998, so go and delete everything prior that. We dont need to follow the compay registration dates, we need to use the COMMON SENSE and not create 2 stub articles with 1-2 sentences in each of them, even though everyone, including the club itself, media, fans etc. wont say "this is a new club from 2016, it has nothing to do with the old club". Furthermore, I clearly included a fact that the club was re-founded and is stictly legally not the same, in the lead section, infobox, history section, season-by-season tables etc., so there is no misleading as the article clearly explains many times that this page covers 2 clubs that are legally not the same, but they actually are. And the Football Association of Slovenia is not the only source in the world, see RSSSF for example, there is only one team called Zavrč, same with soccerway.com, worldfootball.net etc. And about NŠ Mura - 1, 2, 3 – all those sources have "2012" for foundation date, while for Zavrc this is not the case, not to mention that DNS Zavrc wont even meet WP:GNG, so either merge both clubs to one article with explanations about re-founding, or take DNS Zavrc to AfD for not passing notability criterias. Snowflake91 (talk) 08:42, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RSSSF has 1969 for NK Zavrč and that is correct. If DNŠ Zavrč does not pass GNG, than lets leave it a redirect or even delete the redirect. I am fine with that. Next year they will most probably qualify for Cup (22-23), so lets make an article then. 212.85.174.201 (talk) 10:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]