Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Western Reserve Conference

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 delete. Due to the lack of wide ranging coverage (only one RS) and the fact this proposal still needs to pass a board approval. May be recreated at a later date once further along the process. Mkdw ^talk 19:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Western Reserve Conference

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

Nominated for two reason - first, it is merely proposed, and therefore may never happen, making to too soon for an article. Second, do high-school athletic conferences really have notability? Ego White Tray (talk) 02:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Athletic conferences are covered substantially by newspapers in the region and are worth including. Candleabracadabra (talk) 05:40, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about the fact that it hasn't started yet, and possibly won't? Ego White Tray (talk) 01:56, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then we can delete it. The cited source discusses the subject quite substantially. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:17, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, delete what, the article? I'm confused, are you changing your vote? Ego White Tray (talk) 03:55, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 09:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FUTURE. I quote its fifth point:
Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors. Although Wikipedia includes up-to-date knowledge about newly revealed products, short articles that consist only of product announcement information are not appropriate. Until such time that more encyclopedic knowledge about the product can be verified, product announcements should be merged to a larger topic (such as an article about the creator(s), a series of products, or a previous product) if applicable. Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content.
This is functionally a newly revealed "product"; we have no substantial knowledge about the entity, and we have no guarantee that it's ever going to exist. It can't even have any sources that are completely independent: newspapers are only going to mention it while reporting the news, and we need sources that aren't newsy. Wait until the newspapers cover it as an established entity, or until it appears in books and academic journals. Nyttend (talk) 21:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep According to RS reference, conference does exist in a legal capacity, even if it hasn't played any games yet. As to above editor's comment, topics do not need to be mentioned in "books and academic journals" in order to meet notability. DocumentError (talk) 07:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:CRYSTALballery. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 08:07, 28 December 2013 (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.