Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australia national schoolboy rugby union team


 * 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   keep. Spartaz Humbug! 16:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Australia national schoolboy rugby union team

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable players, these are school children and raise WP:BLP issues. Fails WP:GROUP and more importantly WP:ATHLETE.  JRA _ Westy Qld2  Talk 03:22, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Agree with nominator. A noble cause, but begs the question; how it meets Notability standards versus any other secondary school sports team.  Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 03:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment There was an earlier discussion on a similar topic- Articles for deletion/Ireland national schoolboy rugby union team. I will let others decide how relevant that is. However the nominator is right, this is just school sport, albeit at a national level. -- Mattinbgn\talk 04:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Articles for deletion/Ireland national schoolboy rugby union team --Bob (talk) 05:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment this is very different to the other nomination. Usually I'm very pro-sport article, but the Ireland national schoolboy rugby union team is far more in depth than this one. It contains old notable players, tour information, records and is all properly referenced. This article is a bunch of kids names spread across a page, something you will not find on the Irish article.  JRA _ Westy Qld2  Talk 09:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment That is not really an argument to delete, but an argument to fix the article. Articles should not typically be deleted based on their current state. -- Mattinbgn\talk 20:52, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - not notable, unreferenced New seeker (talk) 11:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:07, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. B.Rossow talk contr 18:21, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  --  Bduke    (Discussion)  19:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve, per Articles for deletion/Ireland national schoolboy rugby union team. I'll have a crack at the "improve" part after work tonight if I have time.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 21:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC).
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep there are worse national team articles than this and overtime this article should improve sss333  (talk) 04:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep If article is improved. Not notable at the moment, but other articles like this one have been improved and avoided AFD.-- LAA Fan sign review 04:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Both comments above are speculation towards improvement and is not a valid argument. See WP:NOTCRYSTAL for crystal balling.  JRA _ Westy Qld2  Talk 07:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment while they may be speculative, there is a extremely high chance that if deleted this page will be re-created soon enough, not to mention there is also Australia A schoolboys team as well -- sss333  (talk) 05:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply I don't see your point as a valid one. What you're saying is just because something has a chance to be recreated means an article is notable? If you are so passionate about keeping this article, improve it to make it notable now instead of saying "someone else will do it". My local rugby clubs premier league team has a B and C grade team. Does it make it notable? No! It doesn't even come close to meeting WP:ATH.  JRA _ Westy Qld2  Talk 11:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete if article cannot be sufficiently improved to meet our standards for inclusion. JBsupreme (talk) 07:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep -- The article is a poor one in that it is not clear who they play or with what results, but this is a natiuoanl team at a junior level and presumably notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. Searching by the article's title got me so few results that I began to suspect that it is not the correct name. If one searches Google News by "Australian Schoolboys" rugby one gets 1,380 hits. I cannot imagine that all these News hits are somehow not about the national boys rugby team of Australia. Even if only 1% of these News articles are reliable sources on this particular institution, that is still 14 sources. Abductive  (reasoning) 02:30, 8 October 2009 (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.