Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British National League (1996–2005)




 * 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, without prejudice against a future nomination for deletion if the sources promised to exist are not forthcoming. BD2412 T 01:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

British National League (1996–2005)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Doesn't appear to meet WP:N Boleyn (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Ice hockey,  and United Kingdom.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable professional sports league. Many sources are available as per WP:BEFORE, but unfortunately no user has added any. The article needs to be improved, as per WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 13:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Article needs work, but it meets the notability level required for one. The   Kip  (contribs) 21:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify It's almost certainly notable, but I can't easily find sources due to the fact it's now 20 years old at the most recent. Draftifying would buy us some time. SportingFlyer  T · C  15:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Statistics can be easily sourced through various online databases. Information about the league is best found via newspapers. Sorry, I don't have time to do it right away. Flibirigit (talk) 15:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * There's just nothing online I can find to clearly save this one, but I don't have archival access. SportingFlyer  T · C  13:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep - eminently notable league that was covered extensively in the media. -- Hockeyben (talk - contribs) 04:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep The professional sports league in question is notable, meeting the required notability standards. Multiple sources are available to support its notability, though they have not yet been added to the article. According to above dicussion, it is clear that sources exist, and the article should be improved rather than deleted, as per WP. While the article requires significant work, it undeniably meets the necessary notability level. Therefore, it should be retained and improved to reflect its significance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Master rollo (talk • contribs) 12:15, 16 July 2024 (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.