Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2017 Lock Haven Bald Eagles football team

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 redirect to Lock Haven Bald Eagles football. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Lock Haven Bald Eagles football team[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article is not notable enough for a standalone article, per WP:NSEASONS: "A season including a post-season appearance (or, if there is no post-season competition, a high final ranking) in the top collegiate level is often notable.". Lock Haven finished the season 2-9 in a Division II conference, with no postseason appearance, so it doesn't meet criteria for it's own article space. I'm sure articles can be found that cover particular games for this particular season, but that doesn't rise to level of significant coverage. At the least, this article's information should be merged to the PSAC page, or to the Lock Haven Bald Eagles page. Spf121188 (talk) 13:42, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 November 17. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:01, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails both WP:NSEASONS and WP:GNG. See also my comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 Lock Haven Bald Eagles football team. Like the 2021 team, this is another "less than run-of-the-mill" season for a fourth-tier team. There is currently zero WP:SIGCOV in the article, and my searches did not uncover the type of in-depth coverage that persuades me that a stand-alone article is appropriate. Cbl62 (talk) 15:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not finding enough coverage in my search to satisfy GNG. Also, if the 2021 article is non-notable as well, would a merge to a page titled, e.g. Lock Haven Bald Eagles football, 2017–2021 work? Pinging @Cbl62: and @Spf121188: to see their thoughts. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:42, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My two cents: I'm inclined to be somewhat aggressive in saying "no" to these types of articles. The program is not even notable enough for someone to have bothered creating a parent article on Lock Haven Bald Eagles football (as of now, it's just a redirect). If there are particularly important moments in the program's history, that's where such moments would best be collected. Cbl62 (talk) 16:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in agreement with Cbl62 with regards to a page with multiple seasons. I don't see enough notability with this program to create any pages regarding individual seasons, unless they do make it to the DII playoffs for multiple seasons, but even then should be merged to their parent athletics page, to give that article it's own substance, as Cbl62 correctly states that the parent page for it's football program also isn't noteworthy enough for it's own page, in my opinion. Spf121188 (talk) 16:57, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I may not have expressed my thoughts well. I'm not saying that a parent article on Lock Haven Bald Eagles football wouldn't pass muster. Such a high level article on the program as a whole "probably" would be fine and could be an appropriate repository to record highlights from the program's history. Cbl62 (talk) 17:10, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the order in which the independent, loosely confederated, bottom-up activity of a myriad of Wikipedia editors creates articles related to a large subject is not necessarily evidence of relative notability within that subject area. It's often more a product of personal interest and happenstance. The Lock Haven Bald Eagles football program is an NCAA Division II program. We have lots of articles on NCAA Division II football programs and those of lower levels, NCAA Division III and NAIA. There has long existed a fairly substantive article about IUP Crimson Hawks football, a conference mate of Lock Haven. We should have an article for Lock Haven Bald Eagles football. Jweiss11 (talk) 18:46, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note I can understand Jweiss11's point of view here. It should also be noted that IUP has won the PSAC, (or whatever the conference was named at each given instance,) six times. I'm unsure of how many times Lock Haven has won their respective conference (given that they were at one time, I believe an FCS program.) If a page for Lock Haven's football program is created, I think the season that this particular page is addressing could easily be merged into it. Just my thought. Spf121188 (talk) 19:08, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I created a draft article for the Lock Haven football program here and this season could be redirected/merged there when finished. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:12, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Beanie. Cbl62 (talk) 20:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lock Haven Bald Eagles football given that article now exists and WP:NSEASONS explicitly supports redirection as an alternative to deletion in such cases. Smartyllama (talk) 23:12, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
delete/merge/redirect seems to make the most sense.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:44, 22 November 2021 (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.