Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011–12 Syracuse Silver Knights season

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete all and redirect to 2011–12 Major Indoor Soccer League season. KTC (talk) 11:12, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2011–12 Syracuse Silver Knights season[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Also included in this nomination are:

This set of articles has barely any third-party sources (and by third-party I mean sources that haven't been created by either the team or the league it plays in). The valid sources that do exist are merely for individual facts included in the articles, rather than to indicate the notability of the subject as a whole. These articles were originally WP:PRODded, but the PRODs were removed without addressing the issues. – Pee Jay 13:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. – Pee Jay 13:07, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 20:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to parent article per WP:NSEASONS. Mentoz86 (talk) 04:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've used pages like these for back-tracking sports team records, and MISL is the US's top indoor soccer league. Listmeister (talk) 21:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is your only source for MISL information, then perhaps it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. – Pee Jay 15:12, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom, no significant independent coverage. C 679 18:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.