Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euroleague 2009–10 season attendance figures


 * 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 merge to 2009–10 Euroleague.  Sandstein  09:29, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Euroleague 2009–10 season attendance figures

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Amongst the multiple issues already highlighted about this article is the lack of notability. I can find only this source that mentions the subject and I wouldn't consider it as reliable. I would merge this into the season article but there is no source and I only found a passing mention on the Euroleague website. I'm not sure it's possible to find enough independent sources to do a standalone article on historic Euroleague attendance figures so one on a single season in ludicrous ArmstrongJulian (talk) 12:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. ArmstrongJulian (talk) 12:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 September 18.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 12:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep No reason at all to delete this.Bluesangrel (talk) 18:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The reason that the article creator has no sources whatsoever is quite a big one don't you think? --ArmstrongJulian (talk) 18:59, 18 September 2015 (UTC)--ArmstrongJulian (talk) 18:59, 18 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment Should be deleted if it fails WP:V with no cited sources since being tagged in 2013. Otherwise, merge to 2009–10 Euroleague if there is consensus that this is useful. Is there a reason attendance needs to be a standalone article? Even if it is shown to meet WP:GNG with significant coverage and proven that WP:NOTSTATS is not applicable, the WP:N guideline advises: "This is not a guarantee that a topic will necessarily be handled as a separate, stand-alone page. Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article."—Bagumba (talk) 07:25, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Why not just put this into the Euroleague season page? Would not these info be useful? I don't understand the concept of wanting to delete everything. Actually, I believe other Euroleague season pages also have attendance listings. Maybe this is more in depth, but similar listings or whatever. I think don't delete this info, just put it into the relevant article, which is where it probably should have originally been put, rather than a separate article. But I can understand this concept of wanting to delete anything that has relevant info in it. This has relevant info in it, as would pertain to that Euroleague season article. So I don't see how deletion of it makes sense.Bluesangrel (talk) 22:29, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You could choose to !vote to merge. See WP:DISCUSSAFD for how editors can contribute.—Bagumba (talk) 22:37, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * OK then, I will vote Merge.Bluesangrel (talk) 00:28, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * At WP:DISCUSSAFD, it says: "Do not make conflicting recommendations." As it recommends, you should add and to your earlier !vote to strike it.—Bagumba (talk) 08:37, 20 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge with the main article and re-order the tables in only one, like in the latest seasons. This kind of tables work always as a section in football leagues and in the few basketball ones this stat exists. Asturkian (talk) 07:40, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge since it is important info but perhaps doesn't deserve its own article. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 16:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Isn't anybody else troubled by the fact that this has no source? For all we know the author could have made it up or taken it from an unreliable source. I'm keeping my delete vote unless a source can be found (which I didn't achieve myself). --ArmstrongJulian (talk) 11:23, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think sources should be found. If no sources can be located, a simple redirect may be in order. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 12:32, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as non-encyclopedic information. Attendence figures are primary source data that secondary sources use for comparison purposes. WP:NOT --Bejnar (talk) 05:36, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:28, 26 September 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 08:21, 3 October 2015 (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.