Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indian Rugby Team

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. -- BD2412 ^talk 20:35, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Indian_Rugby_Team

I don't think teams that have never qualified for a world cup should have a page, 92nd in the world - we do not need 92 articles on national rugby union teams as the standard of play falls very quickly after the first 10. GordyB 12:48, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep We have articles on every team in the NFL and NHL. We have articles on every national team the US has for every sport (whether they're any good or not). So no reason we can't have one for the Indian Rugby Team (though it needs work done on it to expand it). Ben W Bell 13:07, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Ben W Bell. Meelar (talk) 14:11, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - although possibly move to Indian national rugby union team as per all the other rugby union national teams. Sam Vimes 15:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and move to the standard name form. The world doesn't need Wikipedia, but let's try to make it as comprehensive as possible anyway. CalJW 16:45, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and move to proper name. We have an article on the Monaco national football team (and every other national football team in the world). I would love if every national team in every notable sport had an article on Wikipedia. -- Elisson • Talk 20:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

It looks like I'm going to lose this. The difference between the Indian rugby union team and the Monaco football team is that 99.9% of Indians have never heard of rugby union where as in Monaco football is the number one summer sport and if there wasn't an article on Monagesque football there'd be no articles on Monagesque sport at all. I don't think it is possible to expand the article, the Indian rugby union don't have any staff at all and as a consequence have no website or press officers. I'd rather see one page with mini articles on 'minnow nations'.GordyB 21:37, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

• Comment I've expanded the article a bit now, and as India's results improve, there's still more to beef it out with. Who knows, one day an Indian rugby fan will expand it even more. There are 13,200 players ([1]) after all, some of them are bound to have computers. Although, if you wish to start an article on all the minnow nations and incorporate this content...Be bold! Sam Vimes 21:59, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I'll remove the tag as I'm obviously on a loser. Don't see the point in waiting 7 days.GordyB 23:25, 13 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.