Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Individual sport


 * 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 of the debate was keep. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;   &spades;  04:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Individual sport
Dictionary definition. There's really not much else that you can say beyond the one sentence given that wouldn't be better suited someplace else. fuzzy510 01:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Ed (Edgar181) 02:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete insufficient scope for expansion. SM247 02:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - there is also a Team sport - it's not a spectacular article, but at least it shows that Individual sport could probably be expanded beyond a dictionary definition. That said, nobody has cared to try in the six+ months that the article has existed, so go ahead and delete it.  BigDT 03:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Already in Wiktionary. T e  k e  06:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, dictdef. Max S em 09:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Teke. --Nearly Headless Nick 13:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Massive room for expansion as per Team sport. --JJay 13:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless expanded. Presently a dicdef. Punkmorten 16:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulations..! Weak keep, since it has been expanded. Punkmorten 23:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It shows a lot of room for expansion. If we delete it, it will deter others from recreating a better article. Even though it is currently just a dicdef, someone may see it and decide to expand it. While BigDT mentioned it has existed for 6+ months without expansion, it deserves at least a few more months as a stub.--El aprendelenguas 20:24, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, I think it can be expanded. -- Kjkolb 02:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * But will it be expanded? Punkmorten 09:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not if it's deleted. --JJay 23:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Point of Information. I have added content to the article; does anyone have any objections to removing the tag? Folajimi 20:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Way to go Folajimi. This will turn out to be an important article. --JJay 03:01, 10 June 2006 (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.