Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Shepherd Rams football team

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. Nomination was withdrawn along with a rough general consensus to keep. (non-admin closure) Qwaiiplayer (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2016 Shepherd Rams football team

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page highlights a season for a division II football team that didn't make it to their National Championship Game. in 2015, this football team made it to the D2 National Championship and there's no page for that. I see that this article does have references, but all from the same publication, a small newspaper in Martinsburg, WV, and wasn't widely reported as noteworthy. I graduated from Shepherd, and follow the team, but I don't see this article as noteworthy enough for standalone. I personally feel it could be redirected to Shepherd Rams. Very few other Division II programs who make the playoffs have their own article for a particular season. This is my first AfD so please help me with guidance if I'm wrong in this area Spf121188 (talk) 15:58, 16 November 2021 (UTC) Creating deletion discussion for 2016 Shepherd Rams football team[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 November 16. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:15, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Virginia-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have not had an opportunity yet to search for sources beyond Martinsburg, but note that this team won its conference championship and made it the semifinals (i.e., the final four) of the Division II playoffs, so it's not a run-of-the-mill Division II season. This should rise or fall on whether there is WP:SIGCOV in multiple, independent, and reliable sources. Cbl62 (talk) 17:45, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per WP:NSEASONS: "A season including a post-season appearance (or, if there is no post-season competition, a high final ranking) in the top collegiate level is often notable." Unsure of other seasons for this team (there is no template I saw), and I realize that my quote specifies "top collegiate level" but I still think this is a notable season. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 18:00, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2021 Shepherd Rams football team appears to be the only other season so far. That one is even more lacking in terms of GNG level sourcing in its current state. Cbl62 (talk) 18:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My main reason for this AdF is the following from WP:NSEASONS; "A national championship season at a lower collegiate level might be notable." I concede that it's certainly a notable season in that yes, Shepherd won their division in 2016, but the guidance says that an article "might" be notable if they make it to a National Championship game, (Which Shepherd did in 2015, for which there is no article) and did not make it there in 2016. I won't vote on this given that I did graduate from the school, but wanted to note that. That being said, if this article stands, I certainly won't be upset about it. Spf121188 (talk) 18:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I've found game coverage from three different newspapers (which can be found in the article), meeting the notability criteria in my opinion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment BeanieFan11, This is just a question for my understanding of the process, but does it matter if all of these references are from West Virginia publications? I'm not questioning your inclusion by any means as it's certainly helpful, I just want to make sure for future reference whether this is still notable given that. Thanks! Spf121188 (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, I don't think the coverage being local should matter. However, I've seen other editors who are against this (saying coverage should be more national) and ones who support this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I want to underscore what BeanieFan11 has said. You will find that across Wikipedia and in other subjects (particularly with events at deletion), many editors dismiss local coverage since Wikipedia avoids primary sources where possible. But there's actually nothing in WP:SIGCOV that specifies something cannot be local (as long as it is independent). Different areas require different approaches to reliable sources and notability, and in the area of sports, particularly college athletics, reliable sources will look quite different than the typical sources editors are used to. Kudos for learning as you go. That's how we all get started here. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 18:48, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Etzedek is generally correct about local coverage. Several proposals to enact a formal restriction on use of local coverage to satisfy GNG have failed. My own view is that there needs to be more nuance, i.e., SIGCOV in all reliable independent sources should be considered, but common sense dictates IMO that SIGCOV in major metropolitan dailies should be given more weight in a GNG analysis than hyper-local coverage in a small-town newspaper. Cbl62 (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep more than enough coverage to surpass WP:GNG. WP:NSEASONS is inlcusive and not exclusive --Paul McDonald (talk) 20:01, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per BeanieFan11's sourcing. Jweiss11 (talk) 22:37, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note I would like to withdraw this page, given that I nominated it, and clearly jumped the gun on it. Spf121188 (talk) 13:28, 24 November 2021 (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.