Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minneapolis Mayhem

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minneapolis Mayhem[edit]

Local rugby team. The 139 Google results turn up mostly SELFPUB, with some scores from other teams' pages. Non notable. SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. -- fr33k man -s- 15:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- fr33k man -s- 15:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Since this club competes at the national level against other teams in the U.S., and internationally in the Bingham Cup, I don't think that local team is an accurate description. This is an interesting situation-- there's an International Gay Rugby Association and it has an annual competition that draws teams from around the world, and this team plays in that competition. In the United States, rugby generally does not get a lot of coverage in the press. Oddly enough, a gay rugby team probably gets more coverage than a team that does not make LGBT an issue, perhaps because there are few similar sports competitions. Mandsford (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Week Keep As per Mandsford, competing in the Bingham Cup just about makes them notable, but it could definitely do with more soources. --Ged UK (talk) 08:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
comment - the article needs third party sources to verify notability. If there are some available, keep. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 22:35, 20 February 2009 (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.