Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austin Ice Bats

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 01:10, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Austin Ice Bats
Not notable or interesting. Delete --Rzm 11:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a genuine professional sports team (ice hockey in this case), affiliated to a real league, selling real numbers of tickets (new 6000 seat stadium to open next year indicates support from fans, community). This is also affiliated to an AHL and an NHL team, so is clearly a feeder team for them. Five other teams in the league also have articles, to consider if people feel that this is genuinely not of interest. Average Earthman 13:41, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * If they're a professional team, with paid players and league play, then yes, they reach the minor notability bar. Keep. Stupid name, though. --Calton 13:42, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a local reference -- there's a huge colony of Mexican Free-tailed bats that roost under a certain bridge in Austin. It's a big deal to watch the enormous horde of bats (1.5 million by current counts) come spiraling out at dusk every day.  It's the largest urban bat colony in the U.S. Katefan0 19:53, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * I know. Heck, I knew before I even read the article, and I've always wanted see the bat emergence. It's still a stupid name for a sports team. Toledo Mud Hens or Hartlepool Monkeyhangers, sure, but ICE BATS? --Calton 20:51, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, agree with above posters. Grue 16:28, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep solidly notable. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 17:29, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have all sorts of sportscruft -- this is a real hockey team, which, incidentally, I have seen in action. Katefan0 19:45, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * WTF?keep. GRider\talk 20:28, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons already stated. It's nice to know there's a team with an even sillier name than the Anaheim Mighty Ducks! 23skidoo 22:51, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, minor league team that's been in existance for 6 years. Megan1967 02:31, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I have to ask - why is a minor league team that is getting a new 6000 seat stadium not notable, but a very minor film released straight to DVD notable Votes_for_deletion/Democrazy_(movie)? Average Earthman 10:29, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. With professional sports teams, it seems to make sense to decide for most of them on the basis of the league the team is in.  If a professional league is notable then it makes sense just to have articles on all teams in the league, even the new ones, assuming there is enough information about them.  I suppose you could have a notable team in an otherwise unnotable league, but that would have to be an exceptional case.  I don't know if minor league professional hockey is notable, but since we already have articles on more than a few other teams in the same league, the question seems to have been decided.  --BM 20:03, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, insufficient notability. JamesBurns 08:57, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.