Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defunct New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association conferences

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 merge to New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:16, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Defunct New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association conferences[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)

Fails WP:LISTN. While I can find coverage consisting of news articles that individual high school athletic conferences have become defunct, I can find no coverage referring to a list of New Jersey defunct high school athletic conferences as a unit. Therefore, this fails WP:LISTN. Hog Farm (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge / Redirect to New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association which should have been the ab initio solution here. Alansohn (talk) 20:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Alansohn: - While a redirect is reasonable, especially if targeted to the realignment section, where the concept of conferences becoming defunct is broadly discussed, I am strongly opposed to a merge, since the list article is completely unsourced.Hog Farm (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hog Farm, the material is encyclopedic and readily sourceable, as has already been done by the article's creator and by me. I'd be happy to add more sourcing at some point, but regardless of what happens here the material will eventually be added in some form to the article for New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association, because it belongs there. I hope that you'll change your mind and join me in supporting a merge / redirect. Alansohn (talk) 22:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I would support a merge now I guess. There doesn't seem to be an overall list of New Jersey high school athletic conferences, so the best merger point would be the realignment section, to kinda state that the list was the list of conferences that were disbanded as a result of realignment. If you support that merge target, I'll withdraw this nomination. Since you seem to be more familiar with the subject matter than I am, would you be willing to perform the merger after I withdraw? Hog Farm (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to disagree that this would fail the guidelines, specifically with this grouping. While you may not find an article that will list every former conference in the list, you will find plenty that mention multiple conferences, and these overlap with each other. Also, this article (<http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/498965784/>), while not listing every conference, specifically states that every conference in northern New Jersey was folded into new leagues during the realignment. The logical implication is that all of the conferences in the list are grouped together in being folded at roughly the same time. I do see how attaching this list to the main NJSIAA page would make sense at first, however, once the list gets longer once more research into older conferences is done, it may end up being too cumbersome of a list to be on the main page. There are some states (like Ohio) where lists are so long they have to be broken up in some way. Generally, lists like these are considered acceptable, despite toeing the line of the guidelines if taken literally, because of navigation and conciseness concerns. There's no reason to have five or six pages of lists because of grouping concerns, when you can have the entire list on one page and use less space.Mtndrums (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Mtndrums, could you possibly clarify your position? (Keep, Merge, Neutral...doubt you support delete). I don't have a position and it appears if you do, this may be closable. John from Idegon (talk) 09:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's keep, using the above-mentioned supporting statements.Mtndrums (talk) 09:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Redirect as per Alansohn. I likewise don't think this meets LISTN, but it appears to be a valid enough redirect target. Ravenswing 06:30, 3 July 2020 (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.