Deletion of Sydney Uni Lions (2nd nomination)

Comment: IP|211.26.182.185}}, it looks like there ''might'' be ample consensus to |userify this article so it can be improved. As mentioned in this article's Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2014 January 2|deletion review, a user account is necessary to do this. You (or someone else working on improving this article) will need to Wikipedia:ACCOUNT|create a wikipedia account to accomplish this. I'm leaning toward userify if this happens
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Userfication (WP:UFY)

Comment: There seems to be only one media article about this topic. Also, |Wikipedia is not a means of promotion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)

Comment: to Sydney Uni Sport and Fitness.  Mindful of our desire to avoid Wikipedia:Systemic bias|systemic geographic bias, I am glad this has been relisted and given a second, longer chance. But the case for retention isn't strong.  I look at this article (and at the similar ones about other Australian university gridiron teams that have been deleted recently) and consider that if this were about a relatively minor sport at a major American university, it would still be likely to get its own page, or at least a substantial section in a more general article about the school's athletic program.  However, based on the fact that so far very little http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/south-west/sydney-uni-lions-want-to-play-at-belmore-sports-ground/story-fngr8hxh-1226725349294 has been produced in the nature of directly relevant newspaper articles or other sources that are clearly both |reliable and independent, it seems reasonable to presume that (i) college sports in Australia can't be presumed to get the same level of coverage that they do in the U.S., and (ii) gridiron football is at best a minor sport in the Australian university world. There is a brief mention of this team at Sydney Uni Sport and Fitness; to keep a separate article, we need to see more evidence of actual coverage in reliable independent sources. I've dug and found only the one article linked above.  If someone else can produce more, that would be the best argument for keeping this separate article around
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Agreed, the club fails  and  (although I do have another external article https://secureau.imodules.com/s/965/images/editor_documents/alumni-magazine/09-winter/sam-winter09-sport.pdf) and, as mentioned, this is due to American Football being a minor sport in Australia. With that said, this club boasts arguably the best record in arguably the premier competition in a nation that had record participation in this year's college football season http://ussportsdownunder.com/aussies-playing-ncaa-football-season/ and saw one of its own, Jesse Williams (American football), drafted by the Seattle Seahawks after starting on the Alabama defensive line in their national championship seasons. Creditable media coverage of the game, and its more prolific teams and players, will increase as more and more Australians follow this path. As cited above, a minor sport in the US college system (say, rugby) does have some cases where teams have their own article, but most are outlined under the respective college/university.  There is no equivalent to the NCAA in Australia; all college/university teams are entered into regional/state/national club competitions, and all can draw on players from outside the university. Thus a merge with Sydney Uni Sport and Fitness article may not be the wisest course (certainly since SUSF's article does not embellish on any constituent clubs, it simply links to those that have their own article) and instead merging the article with Gridiron NSW may be the best course of action, if the case for retention has not been made
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ORG)