Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Francisco 49ers draft history


 * 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. Courcelles 23:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

San Francisco 49ers draft history

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Very long and unsourced list, don't know much about american "football" but it seems like List of San Francisco 49ers first-round draft picks already contains the notable aspects of this article Jac 16888  Talk 10:57, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 11:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - That's a beautiful thing. Nice work, creator! Needs to have a notation about sources used (NOT a footnote for every pick!). Perhaps a title change to List of San Francisco 49ers draft choices would allay concerns. The list is logical, finite, and serves a useful function as a source of in-links. Very nice indeed — let's see 29 more of these! Carrite (talk) 12:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * List of San Francisco 49ers first-round draft picks is good, too. It is a very different piece, obviously, both in terms of periodization and concentration. Carrite (talk) 12:10, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * strong keep this is a phenomenal article; not done yet, but phenomenal all the same. Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 15:45, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  —Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 15:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * In what way is this a phenomenal article? All I see is a very long list, entirely unsourced and with little explanation as to what it even is, but if I'm reading it right its a list of possible candidates for the team, most of whom weren't chosen. Just looks like fanboy listcruft to me, something for a sports website, not an encyclopedia-- Jac 16888 Talk 15:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * comment here see WP:LISTN. here see google books search showing that this passes wp:listn.  here see what your arguments sound like to me: WP:IDL.  Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 16:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking at those results, it seems they all talk about the "final pick" or the player who was drafted, i.e. the content that is already included in the much clearer, better and sourced article: List of San Francisco 49ers first-round draft picks. Actually its you whose arguments come across as WP:ILIKEIT.-- Jac 16888 Talk 16:19, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * commentthree players, so at most one was first round; this list will help determine in which round players were drafted, one of greatest players in 49ers history drafted in third round, 49ers traded player to get 5th and 11th round picks. The overall point is that this list allows one to find out in which round a player was drafted and then through wikilinks follow his career from there.  anyway, this is the best argument I can make, and will bow out of discussion now.  thanks (no sarcasm, really) for encouraging me to refine my argument.  it's been educational for me.  Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It still seems that the notable parts of this article are redundant to other articles: if a player was picked in the first round then its on the other list article, if they weren't but became successful anyway it should be on their individual article, all that's left here are the non-notables who never made it.-- Jac 16888 Talk 17:27, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The NFL draft is not like the NBA draft. In the NBA, just about every star comes out of the first round and there are only two rounds, so why worry? In the NFL, while a page listing just the first round picks is interesting trivia, the entire draft is very important. Stars are generated from all 7 rounds. This list is superior to a list covering justone round by virtue of its comprehensiveness. The other page is useful to potential users, too, don't get me wrong, but this one is an exceptionally useful piece. Including both of these improves the encyclopedia. Indeed, if this piece were emulated by a few dedicated individuals, the Wikipedia project would be the better for it. There's sports cruft and then there's encyclopedic. This is the latter. Carrite (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC) Last edit:Carrite (talk) 02:08, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm the author of this page, and I vote to keep. I have several points to make:


 * The reason it isn't sourced is because the page isn't done. 1978-2008 aren't filled in, and I put a "newlist" tag on it.
 * I have made other pages like this for various NFL teams. No one has yet nominated those for deletion, so I'm not sure why folks are picking on this one.Ellipsis22 (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Because the Niners suck??? :-)  Carrite (talk) 16:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a notable subject for a list. Strikehold (talk) 20:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Userfy I'd like to see this go to userspace for now until it is ready and re-evaluate at that time. There is no doubt that the list could indeed be notable, but it's so far from ready that I think it would be best to keep it "out of the encyclopedia" for the time being.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:53, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment An WP:OTHERSTUFF comparison would be that List of Boston Bruins draft picks exists in hockey, and Los Angeles Lakers all-time roster exists in basketball, so there are other long sports player lists. If the contents get too long, it could be broken up like Philadelphia Phillies all-time roster. —Bagumba (talk) 17:31, 26 August 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.