Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2017 American Ultimate Disc League season


 * 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 no consensus to delete. bd2412 T 17:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

2017 American Ultimate Disc League season

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

nominating on behalf of an IP user, their reasoning follows. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:40, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Article is full of self-published sources and no reliable coverage can be found; falls under WP:ROUTINE. 99.203.30.102 (talk) 21:59, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:55, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:56, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ― Abelmoschus  Esculentus  15:51, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment If we delete this page, wouldn't we have to delete the other season pages (2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016)? --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This article fails WP:GNG because all its sources are the same self-published website and I found no evidence of WP:SIGCOV demonstrating the notability of this event in a WP:BEFORE search I did. As to the above comment, yes, if this article is deleted then the others should be nominated or perhaps PRODed as well, since they are in a similar condition and no one has even tried to defend this article. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:58, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, the league is notable see American Ultimate Disc League, the season articles in general are similar to other sports. I think this particular article has some unwarranted information, for example the roster section needs deleting, but that is for cleanup. Szzuk (talk) 14:46, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I just deleted the roster section. Szzuk (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. A university may be notable in its own right, but that does not mean the seasons of its soccer team are automatically notable to. This season lacks any WP:SIGCOV in outside sources separate from the organization, so it clearly fails WP:GNG. Each article also stands or falls on its own merits, not get to stay because WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Newshunter12 (talk) 04:32, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 23:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - If the league is notable, its seasons are notable. This has already been relisted three times, make a call. Carrite (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited. A university may be notable in its own right, but that does not mean the seasons of its soccer team are automatically notable to. This season lacks any WP:SIGCOV in outside sources separate from the organization, so it clearly fails WP:GNG. Each article also stands or falls on its own merits, not get to stay because WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Newshunter12 (talk) 04:32, 5 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED; self-published sources and no reliable coverage, not even game scores. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk &bull;&#32;contribs) 04:43, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Selective merge to American Ultimate Disc League and delete - This is a hard vote for two reasons: I'm a former ultimate player, and a lot of work went into this, but the fact is that there's insufficient media coverage of the individual seasons. That would be necessary to defend having a content fork.  The organization itself is borderline notable, but with the recent ESPN3 TV deal coverage and ESPN's coverage of the lone female player in the league Jesse Shofner [], there's just enough to defend keeping the main league article. I think we're better off just replacing the individual seasons with a list of the two finalists from each year, with the final score. Man - someone spent a lot of time on this. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  23:18, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep There are sources out there, just because there weren't any on the page doesn't mean they don't exist. Individual games are certainly not notable enough for coverage but the playoffs do generate a significant amount of buzz within the Ultimate community. With work it could definitely get to a respectable status in terms of sourcing.  Willsome 4 29  (say hey or see my edits!) 03:01, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I found no such WP:SIGCOV sources in a WP:BEFORE search I did. Please provide them or your blanket statement without proof should hold no weight. Also, it rather sounds like you are personally involved in this community. Fans liking an orginzation does nothing to demonstrate notability. Newshunter12 (talk) 03:37, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Man, you really want this page deleted. To start, I added a source to the page last night. Also, I do know what constitutes notability, although I may not have many AfD votes I have a lot of experience creating pages.  Willsome 4 29  (say hey or see my edits!) 13:34, 8 November 2018 (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.