Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warwick Wolves


 * 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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Warwick Wolves

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not notable. British university sports teams are rarely notable within their own institution, never mind the wider world. Warwick Wolves do not appear to be one of the mere handful of exceptions. The exceptions are generally confined to mainstream British sports such as soccer, cricket, rugby and rowing. American Football itself is of niche interest in the UK anyway. Besides sites directly related to the team and its rivals, other teams called Warwick Wolves and a supporters group for Wolverhampton Wanderers (often known by the nickname the Wolves), a quick search on google, turns up a single [very brief mention] in the Coventry Telegraph (circulation 47,000) saying that they played the paper's local university team. Article is also unreferenced, given the lack of independent sources there is little prospect of being able to reference the article. Pit-yacker (talk) 12:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions.  —Pit-yacker (talk) 12:15, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. As per nom and as per other recent AFDs, British university sports teams are not, generally speaking, notable.  This one does not appear to be one of the rare exceptions to this rule. Pfainuk talk 12:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Recent AfDs have shown that British uni sports teams are non-notable (even on their own campus). This team is no different. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) &#124; (talk to me) &#124; (What I've done)  13:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 14:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete no sources, no article. SUGGESTION I think we're going to pretty much end up deleting almost all of these team articles independently. I'm not ready to call it a group delete myself (although I wouldn't object if someone did) but I've also been on the "receiving end" of bulk deletions like this.  My suggestion is that we slow down for a bit and let the editors have some time to create the articles/catch up.  While these articles are of non-notable teams, they aren't doing any harm necessarily to Wikipedia so in the interest of being civil, I propose slowing down the process just a touch.--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:24, 29 May 2010 (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.