Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mission Syndicate


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Mission Syndicate

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Prod contested by admin. Fails WP:N. Lacks references for over two years, highly unlikely this page is going anywhere.keystoneridin! (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * keep - First, of all admins are not only allowed to contest prods, they are expected to do so before deleting. Second, the fact that no one is working on it is not a reason for deletion.  Third, the reason given for the prod I contested was "This is a misleading article coming from a misleading front page."  I don't know what that is supposed to mean, but as near as I could tell all 2 sentences of the article were factually correct.  If not they should be corrected, rather than simply deleting the article.

Finally and most importantly, the subject of the article passes WP:N. The team plays in a professional league (albeit in a very minor sport) and has been the league champion at least one. It has received significant coverage in multiple RS such as "Blades' Hartlieb, Mission Syndicate win pro division in rout", "California teams capture four NARCh Platinum titles", and a few others.

Another alternative to deletion is to redirect to league's page, since this page currently has very little information. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment- it has already been established that this league and obviously this team are of the semi-professional nature. The players on the team amount to nothing more than average joe's who have other jobs during the day. No pay or contracts can be offered to these players. In light of this, I would think a redirect could be beneficial to this page if a deletion is not available.keystoneridin! (talk) 21:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind, that being semi-pro is a reason not to have articles about individual players, not teams. Actually, it would be quite unusual not to have an article about a semi-pro team.  --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:26, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - the team appears to be covered regularly in sporting news -- Whpq (talk) 20:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - WP:NOEFFORT is no reason for deletion.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 13:02, 26 August 2009 (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.