Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 IIHF InLine Hockey World Championship


 * 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. References are presently insufficient but lack of these on its own is not sufficient reason to delete. Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk)  16:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

2009 IIHF InLine Hockey World Championship

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT. Full of redlinks and broken templates. Created as part of a large swath of pages by a single user who has since left. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:29, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep World Championships of a sport. And the page isn't much different in condition that most of these sorts of pages. World Championships in a major sport are notable. -DJSasso (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Well developed page detailing a world championship run by a major sporting body. Different than many of the other pages from this user I believe.18abruce (talk) 21:48, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:33, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:33, 6 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Article could use improvement not deletion per WP:ATD. Highest level of sport = notable. Whether there are redlinks and the creating editor is active or not are not relevant points. Hmlarson (talk) 01:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * your argument boils down to WP:SURMOUNTABLE... The highest level of a sport doesn't automatically make it notable. Notability must be established. The highest level of competitive basket weaving doesn't automatically get a page, plus WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The fact that an editor came in and created hundreds of pages about a sport without establishing notability IS relevant. And the fact that the page links to dozens of other pages that don't exists (many have recently been deleted) IS relevant. -- Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:37, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Those are essays, not guidelines. The editor created the article in 2008 and it has since been contributed to by numerous other editors in the 8+ years since. This discussion will help determine whether the article meets inclusion requirements. Hmlarson (talk) 01:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * "The fact that an editor came in and created hundreds of pages about a sport without establishing notability IS relevant," well it would be worth discussing, if it were true for this article. It is not.18abruce (talk) 13:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * See also Articles for deletion/Finland women's national inline hockey team Hmlarson (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2017 (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.