Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triple-V Foodmasters


 * 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   no consensus. v/r - TP 00:49, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Triple-V Foodmasters

 * – ( View AfD View log )

PROD contested without reason, Unsourced, nothing in the way of GNEWS hits for them, this is the top GHits, Fails WP:GNG. (possible hoax) Mt  king  (edits)  05:30, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 06:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 06:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Mentions found on Google News Archives . Not hoax: this team was the champion of 1991-92 Philippine Basketball League season. --Bluemask (talk) 11:03, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG which expects multiple sources of WP:INDEPENDENT independent coverage. All the sources on Google are from Manilla Standard, but GNG says "Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability." WP:NBASKETBALL does not grant presumed notability to Philippine Basketball League. Willing to reconsider if independent offline sources can be cited. —Bagumba (talk) 17:36, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: WP:NBASKETBALL is only for people, not teams. – H T  D  12:50, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * True, but it would seem a logical extension that if a player is presumed notable for playing in a game in a league, then sufficient coverage is likely to exist for a team in the league as well. In any event, the point is moot, as the league is not part of the SNG. It will need to demonstrate it passes GNG. —Bagumba (talk) 17:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I suppose teams in a sports league where all of its games were covered in national free TV are notable enough -- this is a step lower than the professional Philippine Basketball Association (all current teams and most defunct teams have articles), and a step higher than the collegiate leagues (the top 2 leagues all have articles on their teams) so to say that this team is not notable is like saying we should AFD Arena Football League or Football League Championship teams. – H T  D  04:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The concern is the coverage, not the level of play. Not being familiar with the league, I can only go off sources I can find, or sources identified in this AfD. Those more familiar with the league have the option to use common sense and overrule the lack of sources.—Bagumba (talk) 05:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Like I said, all of the games were covered on free TV. If that's not decent coverage, I dunno what is. – H T  D  05:56, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I know what the guidelines say, but multiple articles in the Manila Standard is good enough for me. It's highly unlikely that the Manila Standard was the only paper to ever cover this team. I would bet that there are lots of other sources that simply aren't available from a Google search. (How many older Filipino newspapers are electronically archived, anyway?) Zagal e jo^^^ 00:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Most newspapers (before 2000s) in the Philippines are yet archived by Google. --Bluemask (talk) 03:43, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Google News has stopped archiving newspapers so don't expect new ones getting there. – H T  D  04:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * How so? – H T  D  18:00, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is faulty WP:GNG reasoning. While it may be true that there's only one source online (Google News' archive of the Manila Standard), it is inconceivable to say the list that it was only that paper that covered the team or the league at that time. A similar type of article will be the UAAP Season 50 men's basketball tournament (1987), which used the same Manila Standard source. It's inconceivable that the UAAP article be deleted if it's modern-day counterpart UAAP Season 73 men's basketball tournament (2010) exists -- look at the ton of coverage on the latter article. Would it be logical to say that an identical article set 20 years ago be deleted because we can only get one online source and assume there no other sources? WP:GNG also states "Sources are not required to be available online" hence it's suffice to say that sources do exist, not just online, nor can it be easily retrieved. – H T  D  18:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Other stuff existing is not a strong argument. While online sources are not required, it cannot be assumed that offline sources automatically exist either. Nobody has identified any offline sources. For any of the articles in Category:Philippine Basketball League teams, there does not seem to be any independent coverage cited. All of the articles under Category:Philippine Basketball League seasons list only an external link to http://www.philippinebasketball.ph/, which is only a single source (can't tell if it is reliable or based on user contributions.) Philippine Basketball League itself has no citations and only has external links to non-independent sites. The WP:BURDEN to show Triple-V Foodmasters (let alone the other related league articles) has not been met. WP:V says verifiability is what matters, not whether it is actually true. Editors can argue to ignore all rules because they know firsthand that this team is notable, but let's not argue GNG until multiple independent, reliable sources have not been identified.—Bagumba (talk) 18:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The Philippine Basketball League has 1,570 articles in Google News, showing that there it passes WP:GNG. As for the article quality, well it is crappy, but having crappy articles is not reason for deletion.
 * As what I've said earlier, it's pretty inconceivable to declare that there's no GNG for the Philippine Basketball League in the 1990s when there is sufficient coverage now. – H T  D  19:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * (BTW, the PBL no longer exists. – H T  D  19:30, 15 September 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.