Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Diego sports curse


 * 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   redirect to Sports-related_curses. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:54, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

San Diego sports curse

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WHere to start? Try WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. The article probably has its start from this which was one of the article's original EL. One person's opinion could well be the basis for this. As for the curse, it is a hodgepodge of events and people. Even though there is supposedly a curse on San Diego, this thing makes note of plenty of San Diego natives who are successfully. Like Maureen Connolly who won 9 Grand Slam Tennis events but the curse led to her horseback accident that ended her career. Sure.... ...William 15:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions....William 13:52, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions....William 13:52, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete How can you be "cursed" when it's 70-80 degrees and sunny every day? Seriously though, this is an OR/SYNTH disaster. This article gets the closest to forming this as an actual, notable "thing", but they simply discuss how SD is the largest city without a "Big 4" title, which is of course in part impacted by not currently having an NBA team or ever having an NHL team. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Not seeing any reliable sources using this term. Unless they are presented (ping me if that happens), I will lean towards delete. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as borderline nonsense with absurd statements such as "John Carney was the placekicker for the Chargers for eleven seasons (1990–2000) and is the team's all-time leading scorer. Later, while working as a kicking consultant for the New Orleans Saints (between two stints as one of their active placekickers), he helped the team to win Super Bowl XLIV." Book definition of no original research. Secret account 03:19, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I also enjoyed the sentences: "Like the original Sockers of indoor soccer, NASCAR driver Jimmie Johnson (from San Diego suburb El Cajon), skateboarder Tony Hawk, and snowboarder/skateboarder Shaun White appear to have been exempted from the curse. No explanation has been offered." – Muboshgu (talk) 13:09, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The original research doesn't extend to the LPGA Tour. Otherwise that sentence would have included San Diego native Mickey Wright, winner of the career grand slam, 13-time major champion, and winner of 82 LPGA Tour titles the second most of any player on that tour. That's unless Mickey was cursed by not being allowed to be the winningest golfer in LPGA history....William 13:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect this bloated mass of Original Research to Sports-related curses. San Diego has a paragraph there and that is all this nonsense deserves. --MelanieN (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Correction: Redirect to Sports-related curses as suggested by Bagumba. --MelanieN (talk) 15:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete or redirect - Agree with those above who note that this is a WP:OR and WP:SYNTH disaster, with little sourcing to support a general "curse" to describe the list of bad stuff that happened to San Diego sports teams/individuals. I can see redirecting to the relevant section of Sports-related curses, per MelanieN, but since that section is itself unsourced I am not convinced that the relevant section ought to remain that article. Rlendog (talk) 15:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I added some sources to the potential redirect target.—Bagumba (talk) 22:28, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to Sports-related curses per MelanieN. At least a few of this article's footnotes (e.g. ) are legitimate evidence that the "curse" is visible enough to warrant inclusion in that collection. --Arxiloxos (talk) 21:03, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to Sports-related curses - appears to be simply a huge WP:OR and WP:SYNTH mess, and considering the info is also available in the aforementioned page, a merge is reasonable. NFLisAwesome (ZappaOMati's alternate account) 21:25, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Sports-related curses. In addition to sources noted above by Arxiloxos, there's more:  Really, there is enough sources to meet WP:GNG and keep, but the reality is that there is way too much original research to clean up from the existing article. The more realistic route is to redirect to the cleaner version, and then possibly recreate a standalone article if someone expands it more (without the synthesis).—Bagumba (talk) 22:09, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Has anyone read the redirect target? It says 'the curse also includes the eight deaths of members of the 1994 Chargers team before the age of 45'. So storing hazardous materials improperly and putting them on passenger aircraft is a sign of a curse? No it's criminal negligence that caused the death of Rodney Culver. The target for the redirect is flawed so the redirect isn't a solution....William 23:37, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually I just added the deaths there due to this AfD. It is tied to the curse by the source FWIW.—Bagumba (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Just further proof the whole curse is rubbish. A few people write complete nonsense and all of a sudden you have an encyclopedia article?...William 01:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Nobody ever said all readers need to believe in the curse, just that the concept of one exists among multiple soures, and the details are verifiable and neutral. There's plenty of precedent at Category:Curses.—Bagumba (talk) 01:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete... The amount of material at the location that Bagumba references above is more than enough for this thing... Not a probably search term so no need to redirect. Spanneraol (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Can you clarify your decision to delete due to "references above is more than enough for this thing". Usually deletes are due to less than enough references.  Also, 5 sources have been identified that refer to a curse in San Diego sports, so I'm curious what you believe is the minimum threshold for a probable search term to warrant a redirect.—Bagumba (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing new from the article needs to be moved to the sports curse article is what i meant by that... the amount of text on it there is more than sufficient. Also, the "sources" you and others have provided are either fan blogs or local writers complaining about how their team hasn't won in so long... Having a bunch of sucky teams doesn't mean you are cursed. Spanneraol (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I dont believe there is a real "curse" either, but sources show the concept of one exists. Afterall, Curse of the Bambino isnt deleted just because the Boston Red Sox finally won a championship. I think your characerization of the sources being "fan blogs or local writers" is inaccurate, when the sources are a diverse group of Yahoo! Sports (who back the online magazine thepostgame.com), U-T San Diego, ABC News, Sports Illustrated, and San Diego Reader, which are all typically considered reliable.—Bagumba (talk) 04:43, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Spanneraol (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Sports-related curses as a mess since I would have nominated this for deletion since the Chargers had only one AFL championship and no super bowl champions and the Padres had no world series champions and had couple of National League pennants. JJ98 (Talk) 20:54, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is a shambles. It contains far too much original research. These type of "fantasy" articles give Wikipedia a bad name, which is a shame, because there are many very good editors on Wikipedia who just want to adhere to the guidelines of providing well-sourced verifiable encyclopedic content that people can trust. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 22:05, 8 January 2014 (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.