Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Utah professional sports' frequent use of letter Z in team names


 * 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, which defaults to keep. I'm surprised too. Rjd0060 (talk) 17:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Utah professional sports' frequent use of letter Z in team names
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Yes, that's really the title of the article. Man, I don't quite know where to begin with this. I guess WP:SNOW is pretty obvious, as is original research. But franly, does anyone really give a rat's rear end about Utah sports teams using the letter Z frequently in their names? For that matter, does anyone care about Utah sports teams, period? (OK, I'm joking about that last part.) Anyway, this article is about an indiscriminate list of items with only a trivial connection, and pure speculation about that connection. And its title is unlikely to be searched for by any English-speaking person. Period. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as trivia. All the Detroit major league teams have an I and an S in them (Tigers, Lions, Red Wings, Pistons), does that mean should there be a page for that concept too? This is what we call a non-notable junction. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as WTF? &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 03:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep This is a real thing. The way each name has "ZZ" in it. (Jazz, Buzz, Starzz, Blitzz, Freezz). It's mentioned here. Now this article does have alot of OR and un-sourced claims, but I think it could stay and be remaned to something like "Utah Sports Names" -- Coasttocoast (talk) 03:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete  This is pure trivia and doesn't merit an article by itself.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artene50 (talk • contribs) 04:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, unencyclopedic trivia. If individual team names are attributed to this similarity it can be mentioned in those articles, but it just isn't important enough for an article. --Dhartung | Talk 04:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm perplexed by the comments dismissing the article as trivia. It's a known pop culture phenomenon, albeit on a statewide scale.  It's not speculative, it's not indiscriminate... the sources are there (although they could certainly be beefed up).  If Detroit's teams were named the Tigerzz, Lionzz, Red Wingzz, and Pistonzz, surely this would be considered noteworthy and would be grounds for an encyclopedic explanation as to the origins of this unusual development.  Is Utah too small a state to be considered noteworthy? (Comments by Realkyhick seem to indicate as much.)  A merge would make more sense for those who contend that the subject doesn't merit its own article, and simply renaming the article would suffice for those who don't like the title.  -Macuxi (talk) 05:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No, we are not out to delete this article because we're biased against Utah. This is a "known pop culture phenomenon" which is still trivial. There is no non-trivial coverage of this phenomenon in reliable published sources; that is the core notability criterion, and this article fails it. &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 05:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * As it stands, the article refers to coverage of the phenomenon in the New York Times and other daily newspapers, among other sources. I wasn't suggesting that anyone is biased against Utah per se (see red herring, which interestingly has less non-trivial sourcing than the article in question). Instead I was suggesting that this phenomenon wouldn't be considered trivial if we were talking about, say, Michigan or California or ancient Mesopotamia... places of larger population or greater perceived interest.  -Macuxi (talk) 06:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment That was a fun read. I'd like to thank Macuxi for putting that together. Interestingly, there are several newspaper articles, , ,   that explicitly address this phenomenon. I'll say weak keep; or if not, merge some of this with List of professional sports teams in Utah. Zagalejo^^^ 06:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: it's a mere trivia. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 08:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Take a moment to read the trivia guideline you linked, and while you're at it see this. By these guidelines, this article does not qualify as "mere trivia."  It's not a series of miscellaneous facts; it's presented in an organized and logical format.  Perhaps you feel that the subject matter is not noteworthy or doesn't warrant its own article, and that's a fine conclusion (I would respectfully disagree). However, unreasoned arguments that "nobody cares about this" (or even better: "WTF?") are unpersuasive.  Some reasonably large population cared about this phenomenon, how else can one explain the utterly horrible St. George Pioneerzz? -Macuxi (talk) 04:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Legitemate phenomenon, reliably sourced. --Pwnage8 (talk) 13:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete agreed with Alexius08, WP:TRIVIA. Vishnava (talk) 16:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete pleazze. The references as either articles about cutesy team names which mention Z's or, as in ZZagalejo's examples, by the local Deseret News. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Z article :-) It made me laugh.  More importantly perhaps, the New York Times and other sources mentioning something like this means it's not OR.  --Firefly322 (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keepz, it's sourced, it's weird, it's well... ViperSnake151 20:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Oddly it is sourced in what may be a desperate attempt to keep the article, but yet none of the sources seem to mean anything, for example one source is an average joe's blog which is cited for including the team name as "Lynx" as opposed to "Lynxx", seriously I could not find a source in this article that actually cited this phenominon just antidotal evidence of said teams names being spelled with a Z.Deathawk (talk) 04:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * A few comments up, I mentioned four newspaper articles that explicitly discuss the phenomena. Let's not worry about sources, because much of the content in the article is verifiable.'' Zagalejo^^^ 04:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep with rename: Article title is unwieldy and should just be a section under the non-existant Utah professional sports teams. It is referenced and clearly is a long running joke within the Utah communities. -- KelleyCook (talk) 13:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It's trivia. Some sources aren't reliable, unlikely search term, the fact that all of these teams names end in "ZZ" does not mean that it's notable on it's own. A mention on the teams' respective pages will do, or a mention in Utah would be even better. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 16:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * See my response to Alexius08 above regarding trivia. On the other hand, your suggested merge is a reasonable suggestion (although I personally prefer KelleyCook's idea of using Utah professional sports teams if a merge is determined to be more appropriate than keeping or renaming the article).  Mentioning the same phenomenon in at least ten applicable individual articles would be a more unwieldy solution.  -Macuxi (talk) 04:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Zpeedy Delete - It's a fun idea for an article, but it's nowhere near notability requirements. Ecoleetage (talk) 15:27, 16 May 2008 (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.