Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Empire State Demon Knights

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. Davewild (talk) 19:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Empire State Demon Knights[edit]

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

Fails WP:ORG as a non-notable semi-professional football team. The league doesn't even have an article and there aren't any independent, relevant sources. Most of the sources are primary and/or routine and prove that the team exists, but not that they are notable. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete although the idea that the league doesn't have an article on Wikipedia isn't valid (that may just mean it should be created--Wikipedia is far from complete), I still land on delete for this one. Based on the sources held in the article, I see no independent third-party sources that speak to the notability of this organization. There are a few player bios from other leagues that may be considered independent third party, but those articles do not speak to this team, just to players on the team. I do not see this article passing WP:GNG or any other notability guideline I can find. I would change my position if such information were presented.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My rationale for deletion is WP:ORG. While the league not having an article is not a valid reason for deletion, it's still a valid idea to be made known. I'm presenting what I know about the team in my rationale, and that's one of the things I know, so I included it. It is more of an FYI than anything... -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No worries.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:27, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think so, just wanted to clarify. Cheers. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Appear to fail both WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Cbl62 (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2015 (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.