Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New York Yankees minor league players


 * 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. Secret account 23:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

New York Yankees minor league players

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

More unnecessary fan cruft. An ever-changing list of players that is just as easily had on their respective team pages as needed. A partial list of random players throughout an entire professional baseball organization isn't needed. Jmlk 1  7  05:10, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. These pages are being maintained by the baseball project and are intended to provide summaries of the more notable prospects within each major league organization. The respective team pages are way too long to contain this information. Spanneraol (talk) 12:17, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep These articles are (mostly) well sourced, well maintained by the project, and provide information about top prospects who are not presently deserving of their own pages, a subject of great importance to baseball fans. --Muboshgu (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Spanneraol and Muboshgu. Resolute 14:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This is the baseball projects way of avoiding the issue of having too many stubs about lesser professional players. Seems useful to me, even if I would rather they be seperate articles. Definitely should not be included on the team pages as the team pages have no room for such information. -DJSasso (talk) 14:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Analogous to the way we treat elementary schools, biographical content of minor league players should be relegated to broad pages like this. Whereas individually these players are not "notable" in Wikipedia terms, collectively they are. Carrite (talk) 15:42, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This is getting ridiculous. Per above. Vodello (talk) 20:11, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Spanneraol, Muboshgu, DJSasso, and Carrite. Yankeesrule3 (talk) 01:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Just a thought that pertains not only to this nomination but others using the same rationale. To nominate an article for deletion, based on personal opinion that it is "not needed", rather than citing policy of which the subject fails to meet, is a bit subjective. What may not be "needed" by one person, may not be the case for others. Again, just a thought to consider when nominating articles for deletion. Cindamuse (talk) 10:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep For reasons that others have said.--Yankees10 23:34, 9 September 2010 (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.