Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pittsburgh Phantoms (RHI)

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. (non-admin closure) — Yash^talk stalk 08:52, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pittsburgh Phantoms (RHI)[edit]

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

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}) 17:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:14, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:59, 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) 19:14, 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) 20:34, 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) 20:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Lepricavark. And these other AFDs all seem similar:

--do ncr am 17:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. Blatant failure here of WP:BEFORE by nom. GauchoDude (talk) 18:42, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a Professional sports team, the before deletion policy was not seen through. Not convinced this article can't just be improved, instead of being deleted.--Yellow Diamond Δ Direct Line to the Diamonds 23:29, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Trackinfo (talk) 02:04, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Not easy to research this one as it is by very far not the most famous team with this name. (This is why you should never call your dog Elvis if you want him to be famous.) I found a couple of very weak sources that are enough to stop me !voting Delete but I didn't find any more to persuade me it could be even a weak keep but I didn't look very hard as, tbh, after looking at so many of these damn things I never want to hear of bloody roller hockey ever again. ;-) --DanielRigal (talk) 22:18, 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.