Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 NHL Entry Draft


 * 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   redirect to NHL Entry Draft. If editors want to start articles like this before their time, then they should do so in their userspace. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 18:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

2016 NHL Entry Draft

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON. This event is still 3 years away. ...William 00:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions....William 00:30, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions....William 00:30, 17 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Clearly way too soon to even have an article on this. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:21, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to NHL Entry Draft. We may as well just save ourselves the time here.  Dolovis has a history of starting empty articles because he wants to be the first editor of pages.  Having seen this many times now, I'll tell you how this goes:  This article gets deleted because it is obviously stupidly premature.  In a couple years when we begin to collect concrete information on this draft, the page gets recreated by someone else.  Then Dolovis will request undeletion of the history so he can once again lay claim to the first edit.  So why waste the time?  Just redirect it until the people who do maintain these articles find a use for it. Resolute 01:33, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. We simply don't have a lot of information on it. One draft pick trade and a possible host.  I wouldn't be against Resolute's suggestion either.  Patken4 (talk) 17:22, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - It cannot be said that it was too soon for this article to have been created given that a trade involving a 2016 NHL Draft pick had already been made. WP:TOOSOON applies only if there are no sources to verify the topic. One does not have to look past the sources already included in this article to conclude that this topic is itself verifiable in independent secondary reliable sources, and there are also other sources now discussing this topic, including sources examining the top prospects for this draft. If this article is deleted, there cannot be a scintilla of doubt that this article will need to be recreated as soon as additional trades are made. To delete this article would only cause extra work and confusion when it comes time to enter new trades, whereas keeping this article allows such trades to be recorded in a timely, informative, and appropriate manner. Dolovis (talk) 00:56, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Speaking as the person who currently does most of the editing regarding traded NHL draft picks around here, this article should be kept as it is. NHL teams do trade draft picks two full seasons before a draft is scheduled to take place and being able to add the information right away would make my editing a little easier. It makes no sense to remove this article because if it is deleted the article will just need to be remade early next year. I do recognize that there likely needs to be some guidelines set up to determine when an NHL Entry Draft article should be created, but that should be left to the discretion of WikiProject Ice Hockey to figure that out. Deadman137 (talk) 07:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect as per Resolute. Way to far in advance. -DJSasso (talk) 17:56, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per Deadman137 and Dolovis. Also, WP:TOOSOON doesn't appear to apply here considering there are sources which verify the event's existence. Not to mention that picks have already been dealt for the 2016 draft, so deleting the article at this stage would be decidedly counterproductive.-- Hockeyben (talk - contribs) 00:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:14, 24 November 2013 (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.