Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenmore Panthers


 * 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   redirect to Female Gridiron League of Queensland. Redirect to Female Gridiron League of Queensland. Will save the history. Drmies (talk) 23:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Kenmore Panthers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable sports team, founded last year. No independent showing of notability. Neutralitytalk 19:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to Female Gridiron League of Queensland. Title is useful as a redirect. I agree that the team is not independently notable; however, the league appears to be. —C.Fred (talk) 21:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep The Kenmore Panthers place in Australia sporting history is indisputable. They played in the FIRST ever sanctioned game of women's gridiron EVER played in Australia in the first women's gridiron league on August 24, 2012, were minor premiers in said league in its first year and also played in the FIRST championship game of women's gridiron EVER played on November 2, 2013. Video evidence of this sporting history has been added to this article. Their notable place in history needs to be recorded. 124.187.111.165 (talk) 01:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The "video evidence" appears to be produced by the league. If their place in sporting history were so indisputable, where is there such a lack of coverage in secondary sources? The only clearly independent source is talking about the start of training for the second season primarily, not the games from last season. —C.Fred (talk) 02:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The producer of video evidence is irrelevant. Evidence is evidence. The lack of coverage at the point of inception is also irrelevant. There has been increased coverage this year including a half page story in Queensland largest selling newspaper the Courier Mail (yes people still read them) and various articles in local newspapers. A player from one of the teams is being interviewed by ABC radio this Friday to talk about FGLQ season 2. The fact they will be talking about season two, as the independent source you referred to notes, meant there was a season one. This team played the first game in that season and in the final, in the first season of sanctioned women's gridiron ever played in Australia. I'm not going to add anymore. The evidence and references already provided back up the notability and historical significance of this sporting team. It's indisputable in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. Pgollan (talk) 07:16, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: this user created the article. Neutralitytalk 14:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Pgollan, there is no reliable, independent, significant external coverage. Period. "Importance" doesn't matter. It's about notability. Neutralitytalk 14:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect I have to go this way, too. I'm not finding the independent sources we like to find.  Should the sources be found I'll change my position--and if they come up in the future, we'll be ready for themn.--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2013 (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.