Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sports flops (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. --Core desat  03:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

List of sports flops

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I am renominating this article for deletion. It 1) Is lengthly and unorganized. 2) Doesn't cite most of its sources. 3) Is POV. 4) Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. 5)The main reason to keep it was for the Flops collection, which has seemed to have dissolved. This would be great for a message board or for a sports magazine, but sadly Wikipedia is neither of these. --D-Day 16:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There isn't (and, due to the nature of the beast, likely never will be) any hard and fast way to state who did or didn't flop. That leaves this list open to POV arguments and edit wars. Is Dick Trickle a flop because he just took a long time to get his shit together? The article names a dozen Edmonton Oilers first round draft picks, without qualifying that even first rounders are only prospects with less than a 50-50 chance at a prolonged NHL career. And for that matter, is Pat Falloon a flop just because he wasn't Eric Lindros-esque? (7+ seasons of playing pro sports at the world's top level seems successful to me.) Caknuck 16:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as with other "list of flop" AfDs such as Articles for deletion/List of automobiles that were commercial failures. Only vaguely defined and indiscriminate. -- Gray  Porpoise Your wish is my command! 16:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above and per WP:NOR, as the description "flop" is the unverifiable opinion of the article's author. Walton monarchist89 17:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research, unverifiable, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. A pile of nonsense and not worth saving it. Terence Ong 17:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Criteria for inclusion are absolutely not helpful in determining who should be included in this. Completely subjective matter of personal opinion. Agent 86 00:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, Too much opinion here and not enough factual basis or criteria for deciding who should and should not be a flop. AEMoreira042281 02:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as far too subjective, POV, original thought, and an arbitrary scope.-- danntm T C 05:19, 28 January 2007 (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.