Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rockerball

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.  Glen  09:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rockerball

Rockerball (discussion|history|protect|delete|undelete|logs|links)

Made up sport, violates WP:NOT and WP:V, with a classic walled garden of articles, also included below. NawlinWiki 22:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC) Also nominated:

  • Australian Rockerball League
  • A History of Rockerball
  • The Rockerball Documentary
  • Summer Series 2006-2007
  • Delete and add Rockerball Competitions to the discussion This is pretty much a walled garden for a non-notable sport. (Note that I wrote that last sentence before I realized that Nawlin had already used the phrase "walled garden", showing just how much of a "walled garden" this is.) Barely 1000 Google hits for Rockerball -Wikipedia, and many of the top hits are from MySpace. No asserted notability, no significant people involved in the sport, and it seems that, in the four or so years the sport has been played, only five or six teams have played it. Neither the film nor the book have even been released yet (and, of course, they're also non-notable), and the only sourcing in any of the articles are the Aussie Rockerball League, the aforementioned non-notable rockerball-related works, and Google Video, so everything fails WP:V. -- Kicking222 22:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    • On a quasi-related note, Image:RBfield.JPG has the wrong fair-use rationale and is only used in the main Rockerball article, so it should either be altered or deleted (though, of course, this is an issue for IfD, not AfD). -- Kicking222 22:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per all above. Comment - I actually admire the way they took the R from Rugby and welded it to the occer of Soccer (sort of) to make up the name. In a way, we should be grateful it wasn't an amalgam of Fishing and Duck shooting. Bubba hotep 22:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and improve I can't see why 2 or more these articles can not amalgamated or improved seperately. For example, Summer Series 2006-2007 has been peer reviewed and updated according to suggestions that were posted. Also, after reading WP:NOT, I am left slightly confused as to why a number of these pages would fit under it. RockerballAustralia 23:18, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Comment - erm, it's not exactly a peer review is it. Just a couple of people - one giving advice on formatting only and the other asking what it's actually about. Bubba hotep 23:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Response - First, I think that formatting is important to keep Wikipedia looking like an encyclopedia. Second, with others asking questions, the articles editors know what needs to be added and/or edited. RockerballAustralia 23:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but the article which you stated was peer-reviewed is related to the main article which is the main subject of the AfD. If that goes, any other related articles have to be deleted as well. The argument is that Rockerball is not notable as a subject, so whether the stats from 2006/7 are, is irrelevant. Hope this clarifies things. Bubba hotep 23:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
You are correct in your statement the the 2006/7 event is related to the main article. I still think that the main article can still be improved. RockerballAustralia 23:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
It can be improved, you are correct. Stylistically (is that a word?) speaking. But that doesn't improve the notability of it all, does it? That is the crux of the matter. Bubba hotep 23:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Given that Google News has no results for this sport which has a season underway, there are considerable verifiability problems with this article. [1]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 00:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Kicking222. Sandstein 01:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, this seems to be a very minor support, and at this stage, the article is unverifiable. Lankiveil 02:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC).
  • Delete all five articles listed - non notable sport (yet). Come back once you've got some substantial media coverage. — Moondyne 10:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Michael Johnson 11:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --Roisterer 07:29, 14 November 2006 (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.