Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Losing streak (sport)

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 keep. Bduke (talk) 07:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Losing streak (sport)[edit]

Sorry if this is linked from the main page somewhat but this term is nothing much than a dic def, and a list that has the potencial of being be way too broad and WP:NOT#DICDEF Delete Secret 21:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ per nom. Also, tries to be an article and a list at the same time which does not work. I don't even think a list on this theme could stand without defining much more narrow and specific parameters for inclusion. Nsk92 (talk) 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to Neutral. It could be that this article may be developed into an analog of the Winning streak (sports) article. I don't have particularly strong feelings on the issue, but I am not a fan of the latter article either. The criteria for what is or is not a winning/loosing streak and could/should be included in such an article are rather arbitrary. But maybe this one should be given a chance.... Nsk92 (talk) 16:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What about Winning streak (sports) then surely that should be up for deletion as well. Personally I'm neutral on the subject as I think as they both currently stand they could be good but also have to somehow avoid getting too long and I'm not sure what the answer is. Therefore I won't nominate Winning streak for deletion. Dpmuk (talk) 23:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, at the risk of invoking WP:OTHERSTUFF, I don't see why this article can't be developed into something like Winning streak (sports). Yes, the quality of the article right now is poor, but that's not a good reason to delete. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Keep. Extraordinary losing streaks are certainly notable and worthy of inclusion. But I agree with the nominator that the dictionary definition is inapproriate. If, besides the list, this is all we have, the article should probably be retitled List of Famous Losing Streaks in Sports or something similar; the same with Winning streak (sports), which really is just a list. —Latischolar^talk_{contributions} 01:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Kind of a clever vehicle for sports trivia, isn't it? First, a John Madden explanation of what the phrase means (Ya lose one game, then another, and another, and another, and BOOM, ya got yourself a streak going... only it's a losing streak), and then the Al Michaels follow up with, "And speaking of losing streaks, Tampa Bay lost 26 NFL games in a row once, John." "When was that, Al. Twenty-six huh? When was that?" "I got no idea John-- the damn Wikipedia article doesn't say." "Al, you gotta have information so people have information, some sourcing so that people know the source where the sourcing came from... touchdown, you got an article. And that's the name of the game. Mandsford (talk) 03:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong rename to List of losing streaks in sport. user:Everyme 05:32, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - to trivial to me. -- iMatthew _T.C. 00:29, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - under this name or as a list. It's consisitent with our outcomes. Bearian (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm not meaning to WP:OTHERSTUFF but I think the winning streak article does show the potential this article has. I think it's an encyclopedic enough topic and could become a good, well sourced article. Vickser (talk) 18:38, 14 July 2008 (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.