Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern Kansas League

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Kansas League[edit]

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

I found no significant coverage for this high school sports league. Fails the notability guideline at WP:N. SL93 (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I am unable to find anything notable about this sports league. At least, not the level of notability that we need here. Try another wiki.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:54, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:50, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RELISTINGISEVIL In this case, (1) a nomination and (2) an agreeemnt to delete (3) without opposition should function the same as an unopposed WP:PROD and a WP:SECOND, which should be deleted rather than simply relisted without any reason given.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This would have been closed differently if it were a PROD, but this is not a PROD. I don't really consider two !votes in one week to be enough participation to justify closing an Afd. Afd and PROD have different rules, so you shouldn't expect a PROD outcome if you choose Afd. If I closed this as I would a PROD, I'd also have to undelete it upon request as I would a PROD. Waiting for consensus takes a bit longer, but makes the deletion more "final". If you feel strongly about this issue, you should try to change the guidelines instead of complaining on individual Afds. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See the essay WP:RELISTINGISEVIL for reasoning.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:25, 5 August 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.