Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Basketball Association (2000-) Standings
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 keep. MBisanz talk 04:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- American Basketball Association (2000-) Standings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails WP:NOT#STATS as an unencyclopedic stat page of Basketball standings. Tavix (talk) 04:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into American Basketball Association (2000–) or Keep Spinach Monster (talk) 13:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I see this as an acceptable alternative to individual articles about the league's 2000-2001 season, 2001-2002 season, 2002-2003 season, etc. Normally, I would endorse a merge, but the parent article is fairly large, and a spinoff is necessary. What this needs is some narrative to accompany the year-by-year summaries. Mandsford (talk) 16:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. WP:NOT#STATS doesn't apply to league standings at all (see all the various standings of virtually every professional sports league with an article in Wikipedia). On the other hand, this is unreferenced and obsolete. It's in dire need of updating. Merging into a large and rapidly expanding article is not a reasonable thing to do here, but neither is deletion. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, what is your proof that NOTSTATS doesn't apply? It says nothing about standings being exempt. Also, the simple fact that there are others out there doesn't give a right to keep them, per WP:OTHERSTUFF.Tavix (talk) 23:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Simply put, standings are not statistics - they are, in fact, rankings. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 01:54, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And how do you think rankings come about? Because one team's stats are better than another team. So standings are essentially a form of statistic in which the stats determine placement. Tavix (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This is a standard across all professional sports league articles in Wikipedia. My other suggestion might be to split into separate articles for each ABA2K season. Alansohn (talk) 21:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:OTHERSTUFF? Just because other professional sports league articles have them doesn't mean it makes it correct practice. Tavix (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above. Nom is attempting a bit of wikilawyering on this one by trying to contort the concept of statistics to support a nomination that is based more on WP:IDONTLIKEIT than on WP:NOT. The fact that the reporting of standings occurs on so many Wikipedia articles actually reflects a widespread consensus (by the way - there's a Wikipedia policy being followed here!), which must not be ignored here. B.Wind (talk) 06:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per WP:SNOW, WP:CCC. Bearian (talk) 20:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.