Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New England Stingers

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:02, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New England Stingers

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

Completely unsourced. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT. Created as part of a large swath of pages by a single user promoting the sport or roller hockey. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Professional major league team that was playing at the height of roller hockey popularity when it was on prime time ESPN which easily meets WP:AUD. WP:SPORTCRIT is about players, not leagues or teams. -DJSasso (talk) 19:15, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This is getting ridiculous. Nominator should have done WP:BEFORE. Professional teams are notable, WP:SPORTCRIT only applies to players, and pages were not all created by a single user. Smartyllama (talk) 20:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep no evidence that nom made any effort to search for sources. Nominating with the same rationale for every AfD without (apparently) even checking to see if each article fits the rationale is a non-starter. Lepricavark (talk) 20:58, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Blatant failure here of WP:BEFORE by nom. GauchoDude (talk) 18:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Only Google News hit is Wikipedia itself. Google Newspapers finds nothing and offers up other things called "stingers" by way of apology. Enough passing mentions in Google Books to prove the team existed but nothing that shows notability. I see nothing that could be used to build up a properly referenced article on this subject. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:05, 25 January 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.