Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garbage ball (2nd nomination)


 * 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 delete. Fenix down (talk) 18:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Garbage ball
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Please note that the previous AfD is about something completely unrelated. I do not believe that this topic has enough notability for a stand-alone article and I believe that it does not pass WP:GNG. This was raised here and there was consensus for an alternative to deletion, which was to redirect to another target such as Ball (association football) or Glossary of association football terms as well as adding a definition for the term to the glossary. I believe that the entry in the glossary is sufficient so this article is now redundant. The sources provided within the article do not provide enough significant coverage, in other words, there is nothing to justify an article here and nothing suggests that this can ever be more than a dictionary definition. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. There is also nothing to suggest that 'garbage ball' is the technical and common name for this object. It could equally be called a 'rubbish ball', 'junk ball' or 'trash ball'.

I believe that this can either be redirected to Glossary of association football terms or deleted outright but I'm interested to hear what other people have to say. Spiderone 17:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  17:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  17:31, 16 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - courtesy ping to those involved in the previous discussion on WP:FOOTY, , , , and   Spiderone  17:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone  17:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete as per the WP:FOOTY discussion. Or redirect back to Ball (association football). Certainly don't keep. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:42, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FOOTY Talk page discussion or Re-Direct to Glossary of association football terms. I feel Glossary is the more appropriate redirect than to ball, since ball is about real footballs/soccer balls not garbage balls. RedPatchBoy (talk) 17:44, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually since Handwalla Bwana is the only page that links to the garbage ball page, I say just delete, no re-direct. and just link directly to the glossary on the Bwana page RedPatchBoy (talk) 01:26, 17 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't think it's a notable enough concept in the sense of being regularly known as or described as a "garbageball" to warrant a re-direct, and even its use in a glossary is weakly supported as I can't see any sources even use the word. Koncorde (talk) 18:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete More a dictionary/glossary term than something requiring an article here. Nigej (talk) 20:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - glossary entry will suffice. Unless someone publishes some sort of study into whether players who grew up using these "balls" are more/differently skilled, I don't think there will ever be any more to say than "a garbage ball is a ball made out of garbage"...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - doesn't even need to be on the glossary. GiantSnowman 08:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Thanks Spiderone and the others for all the comments. The glossary solution seems reasonable but, as noted by others, the term "Garbage Ball" is not in common use so perhaps inclusion somehow in Ball_(association_football) would work better. I don't think the terminology is as important as the concept. Millions of kids around the world spend hours a day playing with balls like these, and the articles in the New York Times and National Geographic suggest widespread interest in the subject. If garbage balls (by whatever name) can't somehow be described in one of the 6 billion English Wikipedia articles, I think that's a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IGTaylor (talk • contribs) 19:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If the article can be expanded to be more than a dictionary definition, then I would be happy for the article to be kept. Maybe there is potential for an article somewhere on Wikipedia about how football is played in a lot of third world countries but I don't think this article is the appropriate way to do that. Spiderone  12:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to Street football. --Lord Belbury (talk) 10:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Street football as Lord Belbury suggested. The article topic is interesting but not notable enough to stand on its own (without specific publications about it being released any time soon, as ChrisTheDude pointed out). "Garbage balls" are relevant to the article subject, the current sources could be moved along with the information, a proper common name would not be an issue as the info would not have to rely on an article title or glossary inclusion (something along the lines of "An alternative to manufactured footballs is a ball made out of garbage, such as discarded plastic ..." to introduce the paragraph, maybe) as well as improve the street football article. MagPlex (talk · contribs) 18:26, 23 October 2020 (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.