Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estadio de Beisbol Lic.Eduardo Vasconcelos (2nd nomination)

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 keep. seicer | talk | contribs 13:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Estadio de Beisbol Lic.Eduardo Vasconcelos[edit]

article is about a stadium for a AAA Mexican baseball team; does not assert significance or notability. I've nominated this before; and it somehow got kept; (Non-admin closure). The way the article currently is; it doesn't seem notable at all. - -[The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 00:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Stadium still hosts a professional sports franchise. This may be a case of WP:POINT. Patken4 (talk) 00:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion has been included in Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force's list of stadium related deletions. Patken4 (talk) 00:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Patken4 (talk) 00:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]
Keep, AAA stadiums are by default notable. Corvus cornix_talk 00:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The previous AfD ended in "Keep" because consensus agreed it should be kept. Venue of professional sports team. --Oakshade (talk) 00:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - None of the possible relevant wikiprojects address notability of AAA sports venues. Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force doesn't address it and neither does WP:BASEBALL. So I'm a little confused as to what policy the Keepers are hanging their hats on. The simple stating that it's a AAA stadium so it is obviously notable is not good enough. Notability in general for Wikipedia is based on significant discussion of the topic in multiple reliable third party sources. This article does not have this. This is despite the fact that it has been up for deletion already. The two sources on the page are a single page in Spanish and a list. I would also direct your attention to the proposed guidelines found at Wikipedia:Notability (Buildings, structures, and landmarks). These echo Wikipedia's general guidelines for notability: "An individual building, structure, or landmark of any type is notable if it meets WP:N guidelines, which for the most part, means being covered by multiple, independent reliable sources." This article falls short. If AAA stadia are notable, show me the policy that states that. If there are multiple, reliable, third party sources that discuss this venue, then show them to me. Dave28540 (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The article in Spanish would seem to meet the standards for being a reliable, third party source. It talks about the history of the Guerreros baseball team, but does talk about the history of the stadium. The fact that it is in Spanish should make no difference. However, I found more sources; An article about the history, capacity, and pictures of the stadium and an article about the team, but has some information on the stadium. In addition, there are quite a few articles that talk about the stadium, but not in as much detail. Patken4 (talk) 22:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - The first article you have offered is a government site - the same state government that owns and maintains the stadium. I fail to see how this can possibly be seen as an independent source. The other article is about a game that took place in the stadium. There's nothing really about the stadium. Dave28540 (talk) 23:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Here is an article talking about the recent refurbishment. Patken4 (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It's a stadium. It's misnamed. It holds 8,000 people. The "article" is a single sentence. Unless there is some assurance somewhere in the article that the building qua building has some importance beyond a local and for-use purpose, then there is no claim of notability being made. A clear delete, for anyone who reads the thing. Utgard Loki (talk) 16:29, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as home of a professional sports franchise. Moreover, the most recent article that Patken4 linked to definitely explicitly discusses the stadium as the main subject of the article, providing whatever extra degree of verifiability wanted. I also generally don't think it is good for the same person to repeatedly nominate the same article because he was not pleased with the first result. matt91486 (talk) 03:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is the article misnamed? this is English wikipedia here... - -[The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 15:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no concensus on what to name stadiums in different languages. The Azteca uses Estadio Azteca, while the Bernabeu has Santiago Bernabéu Stadium. Even in other languaues, the Rome Olympic Stadium is titled Stadio Olimpico, while the Montreal Olympic Stadium is Olympic Stadium (Montreal). As for this specific stadium, I have found several names from Eduardo Vasconcelos Stadium, Estadio Lic.Eduardo Vasconcelos, Estadio de Beisbol Eduardo Vasconcelos, Estadio Eduardo Vasconcelos, and Estadio Eduardo Vasconcelos de Oaxaca. And there doesn't appear to be any concensus as what is most popular. The articles here all link to Estadio de Beisbol Lic.Eduardo Vasconcelos. Patken4 (talk) 16:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I see you moved it to the English translation. I have no problem with the move. I see you also redirected Eduardo Vasconcelos to the stadium page. I don't know if I agree with that because the Spanish wiki page says he was also secretary of education and the interior at a federal level, in addition to being a governor for a Mexican state. There may one day be a biographical article on him, so I would leave the article as a red link for now so someone could write an article for him. Patken4 (talk) 16:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article has been improved and now looks notable. Can i retract my nomination? - -[The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 16:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It is a venue were professional sports are played. We have a whole category containing numerous American minor league baseball venues such as McCoy Stadium and Edward A. LeLacheur Park. So to be fair, I don't believe a minor league baseball park in Mexico should be held to a different standard of notability then those in America. The article may need improvement, but shouldn't be deleted. Hardnfast (talk) 11:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Venue is home to a AAA baseball team. —Borgarde^talk 12:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it has not received significant coverage in secondary english language sources. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 02:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't believe that is a valid argument.—Borgarde^talk 06:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, while predominantly English, Wikipedia is not an English only site.Hardnfast (talk) 11:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Stadium appears to be notable. It is the home field of the Guerreros de Oaxaca Liga Mexicana de Beisbol baseball team and references are reliable. It was built in 1950 and Spanish Wikipedia has an article about this Stadium. AdjustShift (talk) 02:51, 16 September 2008 (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.