Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3 Flies Up


 * 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   delete.  Ron h jones (Talk) 01:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

3 Flies Up

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  AfD statistics)

Appears to be a recently made up game. No sources cited, and no indication of notability. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 07:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:MADEUP. Joe Chill (talk) 14:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Possibly made up; in any case can't verify that this game exists. No references cited in the article. There are some Google hits for this term, but they involve a game related to BASEBALL, not football. That's what you would expect from the terminology "fly" and "up", those are baseball terms, not football. As a child I used to play a baseball-based game with a similar structure, called One Fly Up, where the batter hits a fly ball to the other players and whoever catches it becomes "up", i.e., becomes the batter. But One Fly Up doesn't have a Wikipedia page and doesn't deserve one, due to lack of independent sourcing. By the way, take a look at the article First Bounce Fly; it may be a candidate for deletion as well, for the same reasons as this one. --MelanieN (talk) 16:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
 * On second thought I would characterize this article as Original Research rather than Made Up. My experience with One Fly Up, and the existence of the book Three Flies Up: My Father, Baseball, and Me, indicate that variants of this game do exist and are played. The author of this article is probably describing a variant that he himself has played, where a football rather than a baseball was used. That doesn't change my vote; original research gets deleted just as surely as made-up stuff does. But I wanted to give the author credit for acting in good faith. --MelanieN (talk) 17:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
 * 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.