Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lumberball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lumberball

Lumberball (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable, unverifiable sport which the article itself states was made up only a few days ago. Pure WP:NFT material. Prod removed without comment or improvement. ~Matticus TC 09:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. Should not these blatant examples of "Things made up in school one day" be candidates for speedy deletion? (I also highly doubt that more than 35,000 people attended the match). Dr bab 09:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Help Instead of Condemn. This is a legitimate sport with a strong, local following. The 35,000 people was a typo, it is now fixed. What else can I change to allow this informational page to exist? I'm willing to work with yall.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Uberbad (talk • contribs)
  • Delete. Made up in school. BTLizard 10:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Incorrect. This legitimate sport was not 'made up in school'. It however was a collective efforts of dedicated young men to introduce a new style of the old, tried baseball routine.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Uberbad (talk • contribs)
  • Delete. It's a sport with a "strong, local following". Exactly. Local. Non-notable. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Local does not imply non-notable. Delete because no reliable sources can be found.

    Uberbad, even though Lumberball was not literally made up in school, WP:NFT gives a good explanation why this article is going to be deleted. Pan Dan 10:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete, non notable local sport. Have fun guys, though ;) -- lucasbfr talk 12:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. So we played a 2-on-2 baseball game but had an odd number of people, so we made the fifth wheel pitch all the time, see? And we also didn't have a bat or a ball, so we used some other stuff we had laying around. Somehow this constitutes a new sport. If you want to create a truly notable sport, do something different. (ESkog)(Talk) 14:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The sport hasn't even been around for a week yet. How could it possibly have independent media coverage, a following, and so on? Wikipedia is not MySpace. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable and non-verifiable garbage. Burntsauce 23:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable and probably made up at school in one day. --Haemo 04:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Original. So I guess sports such as women's basketball, softball, and women's tennis should be deleted also. After all, they added nothing original to already well established sports. Atleast these gentlemen put a new twist on an existing game. Furthermore, you seem to forget that all sports are created in a moment of spontaneity with stuff that is laying around. Look at basketball, for instance. I'm sure James Naismith is rolling over in his grave now that his original peach basket nailed to a wall has been replaced. Also, unless wikipedia is wrong, which wouldn't surprise me, he used a soccer ball for the first game. I wonder where a gym teacher would find such a thing? I highly doubt it was just laying around. As for independent media coverage, the first game was played directly in front of the Hampden-Sydney College radio station where a student disc jockey was present and broadcasting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.10.243.25 (talk) 01:09, 7 May 2007 (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.