Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1987 Nevada Wolf Pack 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) Smartyllama (talk) 13:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

1987 Nevada Wolf Pack football team

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The New Pages Feed currently has 20 articles created by the same IP on seasons for this university football team, sourced entirely or almost entirely to a single non-independent source. User:L293D redirected them to Nevada Wolf Pack football but the IP removed the redirect. I’m not sure any of these seasons are notable so I’m bringing this one here as a test. If the consensus is to delete I’ll bundle the others in a second deletion. If the view is to keep, I’ll complete the review of the other pages that has been waiting since February. If the view is to redirect I’ll redirect them all. Thanks. Mccapra (talk) 05:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 05:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 05:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)


 * We generally consider these topics enough to be notable since someone covered them somewhere at some point, but we have probably hundreds if not thousands of poorly sourced schedule articles for long-forgotten American collegiate seasons that get created and never updated based only on one primary source (it seems as if we only have this problem for American collegiate seasons?) I believe the redirect should be restored until properly developed, and I'd personally like to see them either draftified or possibly merged into a list of seasons by decade as we've done with other teams at that level, but again it's likely the topic itself will be considered notable enough for an article. SportingFlyer  T · C  06:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Clear and obvious keep. Nevada is an NCAA Division I football program, for crying out loud and the 1987 team was coached by Chris Ault, a College Football Hall of Fame inductee. Cbl62 (talk) 07:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I expanded the article a bit, including sourcing satisfying WP:GNG. This could just as easily be done for any of the Nevada season articles. AfD should be concerned with articles that fail applicable notability standards, not on articles that could be improved. Cbl62 (talk) 09:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed. The articles have been sitting in the queue for review for months, none of the 717 reviewers has dealt with them yet and I think the reason is that editors are not sure about their notability. I looked at them and at the notability policies and they looked borderline to me.  I don't usually edit on sports topics however so I wanted to know what the consensus is on their notability.  If the view is that they're notable that's very helpful and I will know what to do when I encounter similar articles in future - as perhaps will some of the other reviewers who have passed these over up to now. Mccapra (talk) 09:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * As I've noted, this looked borderline to me as well, which is a real problem at AfC - are we supposed to accept this into mainspace because it can be improved? It's not a top division team (though they were later promoted), it's amateur, WP:NSEASONS isn't clear for collegiate sports, nobody at AfC has ever heard of Chris Ault, and articles that are just standings/schedules and a blurb probably violate either WP:NOTSTATS or WP:NOTDIRECTORY. There probably needs to be an RfC about this? That being said, I do appreciate the improvement of the article, and this should be kept. SportingFlyer  T · C  17:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Responding as follows:
 * "are we supposed to accept this into mainspace because it can be improved?" If it's a Division I program (like this), "yes". If there is doubt, page reviewers should feel free to seek input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football. Editors there are quite responsive and helpful.
 * As for WP:NSTATS, it states: "Excessive listings of unexplained statistics. Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability ..." This has no application to content such as this wherein game results were placed clearly into context by introductory prose and a well-formatted table structure.
 * WP:NOTDIRECTORY does not apply to an article's use of a table displaying historic game results. Indeed, such tables are commonly and helpfully used across all sports teams.
 * "it seems as if we only have this problem for American collegiate seasons?" Incorrect. See, e.g, 1987–88 FC Barcelona season (total prose content limited to nine words with a frightfully-formatted schedule of game results).
 * We can all agree that articles like 1987 Nevada Wolf Pack and 1987-88 FC Barcelona can and should be improved. But that's not a reason for deletion -- in either case. Cbl62 (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for my lack of clarity, I identified the problem as trying to identify whether these seasons are notable at AfC. It's particularly difficult because WP:NSEASONS isn't much help regarding college teams. The difference between this and Barcelona is that the Barcelona season is clearly notable under WP:NSEASONS as a top-flight season. I still would not accept the current version of that FC Barcelona article at AfC because that article would fail WP:NOTSTATS/WP:NOTDIRECTORY on its face. I'm also not arguing that we can't have tables of results or tables of statistics, but when the article only includes a sentence or two of prose and a results table, I believe that gets into the NOTSTATS/NOTDIRECTORY article. Season articles need to be well-sourced prose, and we generally don't treat them as such. But really, this is a discussion for another place, and if would be kind enough to withdraw the AfD after the improvements were made, we can all move on (at least until some confused AfC clerk AfDs a similar article.) SportingFlyer  T · C  06:09, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I would like to see more well-sourced prose in such articles as well. I also agree that WP:NSEASONS provides inadequate guidance. It would be great if it could be amended to reflect the reality, i.e, that Division I college football seasons are and should be presumed notable. Cbl62 (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per Cbl62's sourcing and improvements to the article. Ejgreen77 (talk) 14:15, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep subject passes WP:GNG handily, and season articles for Div I schools are typically kept.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:50, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep We usually keep Division I season articles, and it has been improved. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 18:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Withdrawing nomination with thanks to everyone for their helpful contributions per the suggestion from User:SportingFlyer. Mccapra (talk) 06:16, 27 April 2020 (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.