Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix Cobras

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:03, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix Cobras[edit]

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

Completely unsourced. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT. Created as part of a large swath of pages by a single user promoting the sport or roller hockey. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:21, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:12, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Professional major league team that was playing at the height of roller hockey popularity when it was on prime time ESPN which easily meets WP:AUD. WP:SPORTCRIT is about players, not leagues or teams. -DJSasso (talk) 19:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This is getting ridiculous. Nominator should have done WP:BEFORE. Professional teams are notable, WP:SPORTCRIT only applies to players, and pages were not all created by a single user. Smartyllama (talk) 20:34, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep no evidence that nom made any effort to search for sources. Nominating with the same rationale for every AfD without (apparently) even checking to see if each article fits the rationale is a non-starter. Lepricavark (talk) 21:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is one of three articles for this franchise, which also includes the Empire State Cobras and the Buffalo Wings. There are more than enough sources available for the franchise to establish notability. Alansohn (talk) 16:06, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Blatant failure here of WP:BEFORE by nom. GauchoDude (talk) 18:41, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I read the above !votes before I looked at this and I fully expected that I would find this one to be a rare keep among the Roller Hockey articles up for deletion but what I found, or rather didn't find, makes me wonder how anybody thinks this is close to being notable.
Of the two Google News hits, one of which is for the "The 50 creepiest hockey logos of all-time (Ranking 50-26)". There are zero Google Newspapers hits. (Yes, I counted twice.) Where is the verifiability here? Was this really a professional sports team? Did nobody bother to tell their local newspapers? Two of the 6 Google Books hits are people republishing Wikipedia articles and the others look like passing mentions.
In a world where even the most minor sports news is published and devoured this team seems not to have made a ripple in the media. How can a professional sports team make money (which is what "professional" implies) if the world has never even heard of them? I see no scope that a proper referenced article could ever be made for this subject as the sources do not seem to exist. The bar is "significant coverage in reliable sources". I don't see how that can be met. I do see some justification in those arguing that the nomination should have been researched better but keeping a truly hopeless article to prove that point does not seem justifiable. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:48, 25 January 2017 (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.