Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rally towel


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. However, it's disapointing that there was no mention of sourcing and nobody addressed the nom's OR argument. If someone wants to renominate this in a month or so I wouldn't object. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Rally towel

 * – ( View AfD View log )

While a common practice, I can't find anything on Google or elsewhere that supports that this phenomenon is notable. I find no coverage on the topic other than mentions that people waved towels, or that they can be bought, etc. The article is highly WP:OR, and may be WP:FANCRUFT of the Pittsburgh Steelers as there is a huge emphasis on them, and I can no find no reliable references that say that this phenomenon originated with Pittsburgh. Was a contested PROD, with PROD removed by major contributor without comment. Ravendrop (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Further Comment Another concern is that the term "rally towel" may in fact be a Neologism, as each team/incident may have its own nickname (Terrible Towel, Towel Power, etc.) and therefore may we SYNTHESIS. Ravendrop (talk) 01:24, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - Start with the Terrible Towel article and work backwards. "Terrible Towels" are very clearly notable in Wikipedia terms and encyclopedia-worthy as a topic. That article is terrific. The rally towel is the broader generic term and while this effort needs more work and additional sourcing, it's a fine start. This is not off-the-wall fringe "original research" that we should guard against, this is an earnest effort at creation of a seemingly notable and encyclopedia-worthy generalized topic. It's a good effort that needs more work and additional sourcing, not deletion. Carrite (talk) 06:51, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * See also: Rally cap. Carrite (talk) 06:52, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable enough topic. Good start to an article. Needs more work. Borock (talk) 20:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I would definitely like to see a third party source connect some of the dots here, but I think it's a notable topic and worth developing. &mdash;Bill Price (nyb) 02:30, 8 February 2011 (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.