Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newington Nighthawks


 * 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 delete. Flowerparty ☀ 10:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Newington Nighthawks
A youth (15-17 age group) icehockey team, article makes no claims of notability and neither does the club's website. See also Articles for deletion/Connecticut Renegades. (There's no sign that the Northeast Midget Hockey League is in any way notable either, it gets one ghit, for "Northeast Midget Hockey League", which is the League's own website.) Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy A7. No assertion of notability. Tevildo 12:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject in fact has notability from the league they're in and the league appears to be notable enough. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BoojiBoy (talk • contribs) 13:10, June 23, 2006.
 * Whoops, forgot to sign it. BoojiBoy 13:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Not that it's relevant to this AFD, but in what sense is the league notable ? There are indeed ghits for NEMHL, but if you look for non-NEMHL sites, the best that there is is The Saratogian. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, upon further thought I'm more neutral towards this, but I don't think it should be speedied so count my vote as a keep if it will allow full discussion. BoojiBoy 20:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, possibly speedy. Per nom. Also, keeping this is encouraging the use of Wikipedia as a collection of indiscriminate information, in this case the membership and stats of any sports team anywhere. FreplySpang 13:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -- agree with FreplySpang -- MrDolomite 14:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per CSD:A7. --Coredesat 20:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete 24 June 2006 01:24 Ste4k wrote: Topic matter is unverifiable having no reliable published source per Item 6.3


 * 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.