Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Howard Baldwin Trophy


 * 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. There is is a clear consensus for this, however I want to note that references seem thin on the ground and it justifying its own existence feels tenuous. Creation of a single WHA trophies article and merging into that at some point in the future seems to be a more natural home for this but will leave that for a future discussion to handle. Seddon talk 20:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Howard Baldwin Trophy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Delete I see only one source. I really don't think that the source that was given would be a reliable source. Seems like no indication of notability. Fails GNG. Hayleez   (talk)  19:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:34, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge into World Hockey Association. It looks like all the trophies have their own short articles to manage the size of the main article. I imagine a thorough search of 1970s newspapers would turn up more references. pburka (talk) 20:29, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep we have the NHL's Jack Adams Award article, so why not the WHA's counter-part. In fact many WHA award articles exist on Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Greetings, GoodDay. If Wikipedia might has unreferenced articles this does not mean we should keep another unreferenced one. -The Gnome (talk) 17:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The award existed, therefore it needs an article. GoodDay (talk) 17:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. A major league level professional ice hockey trophy is notable. The current citation in the article is a sports encyclopedia which is reliable. Other online sources are available such as hockeydb.com and as mentioned above newspapers would be a good source too. The article needs improvement and such information exists to do so. Flibirigit (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added a more legitimate source, which covers each specific year. As noted the trophy, and others from the WHA, are legitimate, and other sources should be out there as well. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Greetings, Kaiser matias. Listing an item, such as a book, under a bibliographical section without an inline citation is not proper sourcing. -The Gnome (talk) 17:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There are inline citations; the book itself is listed in the "Bibliography" section, while the citations themselves are in the "References" section, and all link back to the book noted. Kaiser matias (talk) 17:40, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete The search in the news brings forth nothing; same goes for the search in newspapers; and the search amidst books brings up titles about something else with a passing mention of out subject, certainly not proof of independent notability. It might be notable among hockey fans but we need sources. -The Gnome (talk) 17:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable trophy of a top level professional hockey league. -DJSasso (talk) 21:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge I added a couple more sources but would not be opposed to moving the content into a single WHA trophies article.18abruce (talk) 11:53, 15 June 2021 (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.