Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayan Astronomers

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:28, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mayan Astronomers

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

I question the notability of this subject since it may seem to fail WP:GNG

ice hockey notability guideline: WP:NHOCKEY Daniel kenneth (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:ORG is the relevant guideline here (WP:NSPORT doesn't apply to teams). I can't find significant independent coverage, so fails those criteria. — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 15:15, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I created this article because the other three teams of the Liga Mexicana Élite all had articles. They should be considered as a set, not in isolation. Cobblet (talk) 18:20, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 17:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. clpo13_(talk) 17:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Top level team in a top level league is notable. -DJSasso (talk) 17:21, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Eh... Keep this was a tough decision but im going with keep Jigglypuff 109 (talk) 23:36, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2010–11 Liga Mexicana Élite season instead as there's nothing for its own article and especially not now, since it's apparently not active. SwisterTwister talk 05:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 11:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep since they were in the top league for their sport in their (large) nation. BTW the Washington Redskins might consider something for this if they decide to change their name, maybe the "Native American Agriculturalists". Borock (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, st170e^talk 12:48, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per Djsasso. --Hockeyben ^{(talk -} ^contribs) 13:52, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I could now see (due to me checking WP:NHOCKEY again) that this is now notable because it is in a top level league even though the particle of content that it now has is not worth keeping without the aforementioned criteria. Daniel kenneth (talk) 16:22, 31 May 2016 (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.