Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/8 ways to safely reach base

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete (ignoring one keep vote from a meatpuppet and one unsigned keep vote) -- Francs2000 | Talk 02:17, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

8 ways to safely reach base
Delete. This page is highly inaccurate (see its talk) and just seems rather pointless in general. The information is already provided (accurately) in the Baseball article. &#8594;Vik Reykja 05:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

KEEPit is a good baseball teaser question, summarized here, rather than picking through a rulebook.
 * Delete as per Vikreykja. Hamster Sandwich 06:27, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete utter stupidity. Osu8907 06:34, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Disappointed. Scanning down the VfD listing, I really thought this one might give me some tips on my love life, but, alas, no. EvilPhoenix talk 08:59, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Information already provided at Baseball. DarthVader 11:32, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Leaning keep. The bugs in the article can be fixed, so that shouldn't be how the question is decided. To me, the question ought to be "will having this article make it easier to find the information?" There's no "ways to reach base safely" section there, and some of the rules being discussed here (e.g. the "hit an umpire rule") aren't even mentioned in baseball, so this information is not in fact available there; so, the article might be worth fixing and keeping. Noel (talk) 15:07, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The "bugs in the article" are directly represented in the title. There are simply not eight ways to safely reach base. &#8594;Vik Reykja 16:29, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, so rename it to "Ways to safely reach base in baseball". Noel (talk) 21:12, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Baseball.Bollar 15:29, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * So you would type in "8 ways to safely reach base"? If you don't think people would type that in the search box, then the redirect is totally useless.  I have created many redirects to aid people in finding what they're looking for, this wouldn't help at all. &#8594;Vik Reykja 16:29, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Like in said in my edit summary, redirects are cheap. If the baseball article has the valid information, what's the harm in redirecting to it?  It's not like 8 ways to safely reach base is going to be used for anything else.  Bollar 16:42, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, redirects are cheap, but the odds of someone typing "8 ways to safely reach base" into the search are so tiny, that I'd be willing to bet cash against it ever happening. Leaving it in just clutters the Wiki with noise. Delete . Fernando Rizo T/C 18:54, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * But as I just pointed about above, the baseball article does not (or did not, as of when I looked at it) have all that information. Noel (talk) 21:12, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The first hit of a Google search of 8 ways to safely reach base returns the since deleted article 7 ways to safely reach base. Same for ways to safely reach base which seems like a reasonable search question.  While I think you're correct that the probability of someone entering this exact phrase into Wikipedia's search box is exactly -0-, it does appear to help in search engine ranking and helping refer new users to Wikipedia.  In any event, had I come across this article first and knew enough about baseball to know that it was inaccurate, I would have merged and redirected it in accordance with the deletion policy.  Bollar 19:08, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * That's a great point, Bollar, but I'm still uncomfortable with the factual inaccuracy conveyed by the title. After checking The Rules, it would appear that the article is factually correct. My mistake. Let's put up a ways to safely reach base article and make it a redirect to Baseball. Fernando Rizo T/C 16:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I would really like to see which rules you checked. Rules 10.05 and 10.06 of the Official Rules of Baseball clearly describe what reaching safely means.  The article in question is flat out incorrect. &#8594;Vik Reykja 17:05, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename and redirect. OK, I give :). Let's rename it to Eight ways to safely reach base in baseball or Ways to safely reach base in baseball; Only dates should be written as numerals in WP article titles. Otherwise, no further objection from me. :) Fernando Rizo T/C 16:20, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete if there is something new - add it to Baseball. Renata3 00:01, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep This would make a good link from the baseball article under "Also See." Frequently, information is easier to digest if it's broken into short pieces. This article could be a useful teaching aid for a little league coach and can easily be printed on 1 page in its current format. Someone obviously put some thought into it and as is stated above, it's not available elsewhere (e.g., under baseball. -asx- 05:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep IMO it's a handy list to have (otherwise I wouldn't have added to it). I've made a couple attempts to "fix" the article, to address some (arguable) inaccuracies with regard to baseball scoring. Since baseball has a "lists and statistics" section, I would say that would be the place to link this article.William L. Gann 03:20, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * So if I wrote an article titled X ways to play guitar, and put in the list such things as cutting off the strings and sawing the neck in two, you would find that relevant and useful? This is an encyclopedia we're writing here; we should not consciously include bogus information.  &#8594;Vik Reykja 03:47, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * That's a poor analogy and is beside the point. "Bogus information" is a reason to fix not delete. Since baseball has certain rules that are famoulsly complex and difficult to understand (infield fly anyone?) this type of article has heightened utility, even if it's difficult to find the right place for it. Maybe that place is not Wikipedia, but this is exactly the kind of thing that can (and probably does) appear as a sidebar in a baseball reference book. It qualifies as trivia in some sense, and therefore should not IMO redirect straight to the main article--a reader who wanted an information on such a specific sub-topic within baseball would probably not learn anything from the main article.William L. Gann 21:35, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not really Wikipedia material - The Time Killer
 * Delete content duplication. JamesBurns 06:56, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * To repeat yet again, this content is not duplicated at baseball. There's no "ways to reach base safely" section there, and some of the rules being discussed in this article (e.g. the "hit an umpire rule") aren't even mentioned there, so this information is not in fact available elsewhere. Noel (talk) 15:40, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * There doesn't need to be a "ways to reach base safely" section, the information just needs to be there. Take a look at baserunning. &#8594;Vik Reykja 17:10, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I was actually looking for this list today. I could not find it at Baseball or at Batting (baseball), where I did see the reference to this article. &mdash; Fingers-of-Pyrex 21:21, July 27, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.