Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013–14 Invicta Dynamos season

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 redirect‎ to Invicta Dynamos. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2013–14 Invicta Dynamos season[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

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

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

Fails WP:NSEASON. No notable content, so no need to salvage information. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Ice hockey. –Aidan721 (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:15, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (a summary) to a higher level article. I agree there isn't a need for a standalone article, but straight deletion will not benefit readers. Thryduulf (talk) 17:40, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:09, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In response to a message on my talk page, by "higher level article" I mean something like either Invicta Dynamos or Invicta Dynamos seasons (I'm not familiar with naming conventions in this topic area so it may exist under a different title), using these articles to form the basis of such an article if it doesn't exist already. I don't have strong opinions what the best target is, just that I see merging somewhere as better for our readers than deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 20:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 00:26, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Invicta Dynamos. I want to agree with Thryduulf that merge would be approrpiate, but I considered how we would do that, and what would be merged and it was quite hard to see which of this information should be included on the parent page. These pages are uniformly sourced to the club's own page, [1] which is neither secondary nor independent, and clearly not multiple either. There is thus no evidence that any of this level of detail is notable per WP:GNG. It could all be deleted per policy. Anyone interested in things like which players in the team were "iced" in a certain year should look at the source of the information, the above web site. But it is not notable information for an encyclopaedic article. However, on the basis that an editor could, in the future, perhaps find something notable to harvest from these pages, and with independent, secondary reliable sources, a WP:ATD of redirect would preserve the edit history on these. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Invicta Dynamos for now. If content is added to a specific section or another more general page, can be retargeted then. Alpha3031 (t • c) 09:34, 29 October 2023 (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.