Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1881 Georgetown football team


 * 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 Draftify‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to save BeanieFan11 the step of asking me for it since I'm happy to do this for any established editor. I am not redirecting to Georgetown football, pre–1890 since that's a redirect to Georgetown football, 1874–1889 which is up for AfD. Should it survive, the merger can happen from draft space. I believe this saves everyone's time and also solves to the consensus that it doesn't currently belong in mainspace as its own page. Star  Mississippi  02:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

1881 Georgetown football team

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Subject does not meet the WP:NSEASONS. This team didn't play any actual games, and the only secondary source merely recants the report on the only scheduled game from the student newspaper, which is not WP:INDY. Let&#39;srun (talk) 22:22, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Washington, D.C.. Let&#39;srun (talk) 22:22, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Moreover, there is no plausible claim to notability as even Georgetown doesn't count this season (Georgetown records its first year as being 1887) which consisted of (i) zero games played, and (ii) a forfeit claimed against a local high school that sent word they could not play. Cbl62 (talk) 23:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete, a nothingburger. Nothing happened, nothing significant was written. Geschichte (talk) 09:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling that several other early seasons would also be subject to a "delete" fate if brought to AFD; Georgetown is a historic Division I team and one of the oldest in the country (dating to 1874) – we should have coverage on all the seasons of said programs, whether that is in standalones or mergers – maybe we could draftify this so I can make a valid merger article? (maybe Georgetown football, 1874–1889 - the first 15 years after the team's founding?) BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Object to the seasons which come before 1887, as they are not recognized by the school. Let&#39;srun (talk) 23:39, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think whether the team "recognizes" the games (and they did before 1950) should matter as to whether we can cover them – what matters is if the team played the games, in my opinion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:19, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * what matters is if the team played the games In this case, though, the game wasn't even played, as the local high school kids sent word that they couldn't make it. Cbl62 (talk) 00:27, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I know, but there appears to be several other pre-1887 seasons, e.g. 1883 Georgetown Hoyas football team, where they did play. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The thing is that just because a few students organized a club team to challenge some random teams to de facto exhibitions doesn't mean that there was a team representing the school officially. This wasn't an intercollegiate team by any stretch, and didn't play any games. Let&#39;srun (talk) 02:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My reason for a merger is that there are other early seasons, e.g. 1883, that were intercollegiate games, that would likely be deleted at AFD, thus a merger documenting all the early Georgetown seasons would be most beneficial. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, but they were not "varsity" level games. I could write a article about the club football team at Georgetown, but it wouldn't meet the WP:NSEASONS. The same principle applies here. In any event, this discussion covers just 1881, not the other seasons, and I don't see any record of a 'team' playing actual games in 1874. The origins of the team can be covered at Georgetown football. Let&#39;srun (talk) 12:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * How do you determine that the 1883 season was not a varsity season (played against another long-standing college)? Draftifiying assists me in creating a valid merger target which includes enough seasons to make it notable (we should have coverage of these games somewhere). BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It is not included in the official team records, which suggests that the games were either WP:ROUTINE non-official exhibitions (failing WP:NSEASONS still) or the team wasn't sanctioned by the university. I'll ask again, since you ignored it the first time, but what evidence is there to suggest a team played any games in 1874, the first year of your suggested merge? No team that played 0 games meets WP:NSEASONS. Let&#39;srun (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * And it not meeting NSEASONS is the exact reason that I wish to create a merger target. Once this is draftified and I have the time to work on it all the finer points can be worked out. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I am open to a possible article involving the seasons from 1887 onward, but not anything prior to that. Let&#39;srun (talk) 02:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * So you're just saying that we should, despite pre-1950 Georgetown media guides recognizing them and newspaper evidence, ignore that all seasons prior to 1887 that occurred and erase it from Wikipedia? That doesn't make sense. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If they don't meet the notability guidelines in place, they can't have a standalone article or even a merged article if they still can't meet those guidelines. A couple of sentences covering the origins of football at Georgetown football still allows the most pertinent info to be covered. WP:ILIKEIT is not a reason to keep any article, and I am still seeking evidence that there was even a team that played any games at the start of your hypothetical season merge target. Let&#39;srun (talk) 03:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This is getting plain ridiculous. An article not meeting notability criteria is the exact reason for a merger. All I am asking is for a draftifcation so that I may find a way to adequately cover the early Georgetown seasons; what wrong possibly could be done by that? None! This is not a ILIKEIT argument at all; I don't care about Georgetown; all that matters to me is that we adequately cover the histories of top-Division football programs... BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I am opposed to including 'seasons' which were not really seasons in a merge season target which includes real seasons. If you can't understand that, I don't know what to say. Let&#39;srun (talk) 00:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * As I said, the details can be worked out later. There is no issue with draftification for now. I don't know what to say. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:04, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * But you just said that you wanted to create a merger target including the seasons from 1874-1889. That seems a bit specific and not much of "working the details out later". Let&#39;srun (talk) 01:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * maybe we could draftify this so I can make a valid merger article? (maybe Georgetown football, 1874–1889 - the first 15 years after the team's founding?) That's not saying I've set in stone exactly what I am going to do. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My point is that is you are requesting this article to be saved as a draft, you are implying that there is a merge season article that would include this 'season' in it, which as a non-official season with 0 intercollegiate games (or any games played whatsoever) I might add doesn't meet any notability criteria. I gave you an alternative option that the early history of this team could be covered, and you rejected it. Let&#39;srun (talk) 20:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My point is that this still was a "team" and there is one result that still happened - it not meeting notability is the reason to merge for the last time. An article on the early history of Georgetown football would warrant a mention of it. What wrong is done by draftifying it? The only "wrong" that could be done here would be hiding from readers history of a Division I football team because YOUDONTLIKEIT. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It is under the assumption that there is a season merge article that would include this 'season', which for the last time I'm saying there isn't since this was a non-official non-season where the 'team' didn't play any games. I love watching football, I don't love keeping articles that don't meet the WP:NSEASONS because of WP:NOHARM. Let&#39;srun (talk) 15:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I just added a short explainer of this 'season' in the history section at Georgetown football. Hopefully you appreciate this solution. Let&#39;srun (talk) 15:11, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think that mention is really WP:DUE especially since other early seasons (e.g. 1883, which actually did play games) are not mentioned. I am NOT saying to keep this - I repeat - I am NOT saying to keep this - just to draftifiy so that, when I have time (your mass deletion-related activities have definitely costed me a lot of time I otherwise would have been able to spend improving articles) we can work out an article covering early Georgetown seasons that mentions this - if you think it DUE to mention it at the Georgetown article, then it certainly is DUE enough to mention it in an article containing all the early Georgetown football history. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:06, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Mentions of the 1883 games can also be added there. The rest of what you wrote, take it to ANI if you want, it has nothing to do with the discussion of THIS season. You actually are advocating to keep it, you are just trying to pretend that you aren't by first creating a draft and once the smoke has cleared putting it back in mainspace. Let&#39;srun (talk) 18:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It is incomprehensible why I should not be given a chance to merge per NSEASONS early Georgetown seasons - as Cbl62 said at a related discussion where you similarly had illogical opposition to my improvement attempts: "...But I don't think we need to cross that bridge in order to justify draftification for an established user like Beanie who has demonstrated ability in building viable merger targets. Worst case, he fails and the draft gets deleted in six months. I don't see any downside to letting Beanie work on it in draftspace." BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This is a different discussion. I am open to a WP:ATD there but can't draftify it per WP:DRAFTIFY. Let's stick to the issue at hand, which is this season. Let&#39;srun (talk) 18:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * You actually are advocating to keep it, you are just trying to pretend that you aren't by first creating a draft and once the smoke has cleared putting it back in mainspace. Wow. Talk about Assume good faith. You really think I'm that low? I would never do that. But anyway, this whole argument is moot now that I created a merger target in Georgetown football, pre–1890. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:02, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No objection by me to draftification. Cbl62 (talk) 21:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Georgetown football, pre–1890 as a resonable WP:ATD. Cbl62 (talk) 00:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Georgetown football, pre–1890. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:44, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * 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.