Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bishop's Stortford District Netball League
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was delete. Chick Bowen 18:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bishop's Stortford District Netball League and Bishop's Stortford Netball Club[edit]
It seems a shame to delete this, but I've recently become aware of the fact that I've got deletionist tendencies, and the doctir said the best way to deal with this is by AFDing articles. This one deserves AFDing as it seems rather non notable. Its a shame, because it is harmless, but it is my duty as a future admin and a netball enthusiast (OK, I lie about the netball enthusiasm) to open a small discussion about the Wikipedia worthiness of this article. Dangherous 17:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non-notable. -- Kicking222 17:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- So this is a municipal amateur league based around an obscure sport? Delete as NN, off the overhead stanchion, carom off the mascot's left ear, nothing but net. RGTraynor 20:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Non-notable is not grounds for deletion. (And the sport is obscure in America, not elsewhere.) It should probably be deleted as unverifiable, however. (Not a vote, as I haven't done the research myself :) Ziggurat 21:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Have you read WP:CSD? Non-notable is clearly grounds for deletion. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider WP:N, specifically "There is no official policy on notability". Or WP:DP, which does not mention general notability as a grounds for deletion. Ziggurat 22:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you go from "there is no official policy" to "you can't use that as ground for deletion"? User:Zoe|(talk) 16:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I should have written rather than implied "in my opinion" to my opinion. There is controversy over whether notability should be used or not (WP:N outlines the arguments well), so I'm uneasy about an AfD that uses only that argument as grounds for deletion. I think that in this case there are valid grounds for deletion, but four people's opinion that it is not notable (without reference or support for that opinion) is too subjective. I'd be much more likely to be convinced by a demonstration of non-notability than a description. Ziggurat 21:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you go from "there is no official policy" to "you can't use that as ground for deletion"? User:Zoe|(talk) 16:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider WP:N, specifically "There is no official policy on notability". Or WP:DP, which does not mention general notability as a grounds for deletion. Ziggurat 22:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Have you read WP:CSD? Non-notable is clearly grounds for deletion. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable. Bishop's Stortford is not a large town (I grew up in the area, and my mother was born in the town), and neither of these two enterprises will be anything other than very small. --BillC 21:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment no strong feelings either way, apart from the article in principle are harmless and Wikipedia claims to be the sum of human knowledge. However both articles are very sloppily written, suggest a complete rewrite if kept. Jcuk 22:52, 26 April 2006 (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.