Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2017 Raleigh Flyers 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 redirect to Raleigh Flyers (AUDL) / Austin Sol. So Why 17:36, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 Raleigh Flyers season[edit]

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

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

I know that Ultimate is quickly becoming a more popular/visible sport, but I think the focus should be more on the team articles than incredibly detailed trivia about individual seasons. Content of the article is little more than what's on the stats pages used as references. Primefac (talk) 21:20, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand this point, but personally, I think having the individual season article means the information is collated on wikipedia, while meaning it doesn't take over the main page for the team (e.g. the Austin Sol page becoming just lists of match results?), especially as the information builds up over multiple seasons. Ult580 (talk) 23:26, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, having looked at a few pages from football/soccer which these pages were loosely based on (I know Ultimate isn't quite on the same level of popularity), there's a lot of stats dumped on the pages in a very similar way to these Ultimate season pages. For example, 2016–17 Sunderland A.F.C. season. Ult580 (talk) 23:31, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that page shouldn't exist either; I haven't looked at it. But OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, and we're looking at these two pages. Primefac (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I didn't realise that was something to be aware of. In your opinion, is the problem with the pages that they're mostly just stats (which could be fixed by adding more text about the season), or that the focus should just be on effectively merging them into the general articles for the two teams regardless? Ult580 (talk) 16:36, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's just no indication that these seasons are particularly notable. Wikipedia articles require significant coverage of a subject in independent reliable sources. Stats pages just verify that the season took place, and nothing else. What demonstrates that this season is worth including in the encyclopaedia? Primefac (talk) 16:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NSEASONS suggests that as this is a top-level season it should be notable enough (at least if more text is added, rather than just stats), but this doesn't fully take into account the fact the sport is Ultimate, so I'm happy to just go with your judgement on this, which is presumably to delete?). Ult580 (talk) 16:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You make a fair point, but that same section also says that season articles shouldn't simply be a wall of stats. Primefac (talk) 16:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd probably say the two articles should be deleted then. I've copied the info from both of them into sandboxes on my user page, so I can add any necessary information onto the main pages for the two teams. (I have no idea how the actual deletion process works here though, so I'll leave it to you) Ult580 (talk) 17:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:50, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:50, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 01:50, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 09:47, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 09:23, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to the main team page. In the future, if this becomes more mainstream, with more coverage, it might warrant their own page, but not currently. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:47, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to main team page. No harm in having the redirect. As Primefac says above, there's not enough coverage to warrant a separate season article yet. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:37, 18 June 2017 (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.