Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/USA Hockey Inline


 * 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   merge to USA Roller Sports. There are several candidates for the merger destination, USA Roller Sports is the most relevant. Kim Dent-Brown  (Talk)  19:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

USA Hockey Inline

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This organization no longer exists. The Amateur Athletic Union along with USA Roller Sports is now the governing body. Since this page has been a stub since 2006 and most official information about USA Hockey Inline has been removed, this article has no chance in becoming more than a stub and should be deleted. Sources: http://usahockey.cachefly.net/Inline/InlineSplash.html linked from http://www.usahockey.com/ ChadH  (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Merge anything we have here and redirect to USA Hockey, of which this was a subsidiary. There is and will continue to be some secondary coverage of the league, but from what little I can find, I didn't quite see WP:GNG, and I suspect that the topic would benefit most from unified coverage.  Please note that primary coverage also still exists at the Wayback Machine, e.g., .   --joe deckertalk to me 02:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Clarification: I have no objection to keep if notability can be shown, folks are right point out that notability is not temporary.  The question is has this organization ever evidenced notability.  Additional sources would sway me, since I found (and added) the one bit of secondary coverage longer than a passing mention. But that's still short of WP:GNG, and I haven't seen a keep rationale yet that argues otherwise. --joe deckertalk to me 01:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -Scottywong | express _ 18:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Redirect - to Inline hockey as there is little to no information in this 1 1/2 sentence article. I honestly feel that merging this information would just be confusing, unnecessary and unencyclopedic.  The redirect would be a viable search term. - Pmedema (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge and reidirect to USA Hockey. Redirect is a viable search term, one looking for this term will probably be better suited to read the article on  the organisation  and not the sport. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge Being defunct does not make something not notable. Being short is not a reason for deletion, but it is a reason for merging if a good target can be found. Dew Kane (talk) 16:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree that no longer existing is not a reason for deletion. We're not a directory of current sports organizations, but an encyclopedia of all that ever were notable. If material has been removed, it should be reinserted. Unless the current orgnaization is a direct official successor with just the name changed, it shouldn't be merged.  DGG ( talk ) 01:17, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect to USA Hockey. Being defunct doesn't make something non-notable, but it also doesn't make something notable.  Sources make something notable, and the one source currently in this article does not represent significant coverage.  -Scottywong | comment _  16:48, 31 May 2012 (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.