Deletion of 1979–80 Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball team

Comment: Easily meets , per Bagumba's sources. Like Rikster said, this was a top-10 team through most of the season for University of Notre Dame|one of the most notable athletic universities in the country. The idea that this ever wasn't notable is ridiculous. Could the article be improved? Sure it could. But, that's an editing issue, not a deletion issue (i.e. Wikipedia:Deletion is not cleanup|Deletion is not cleanup
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Meets  with significant coverage in multiple, independent source. I've found https://www.nytimes.com/1979/11/25/archives/a-preview-of-the-20-top-college-basketball-teams-not-since-the.html "A Preview of the 20 Top College Basketball Teams". November 25, 1979, ''The New York Times'', https://www.si.com/vault/1980/12/01/825187/the-top-20 "The Top 20". December 1, 1980. ''Sports Illustrated'', https://www.newspapers.com/clip/28965500/ "High rating doesn't rate too high with Carnesecca, Valvano". December 2, 1979. ''New York Daily News'' during the season. After the season, there's https://www.newspapers.com/clip/28965479/ "ND eyes 8th straight NCAA tourney". November 12, 1980. ''The Kokomo Tribune'' and https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1993-02-21-9303183497-story.html "IRISH VS. DE PAUL: IT'S STRICTLY PERSONAL". February 21, 1993. ''Chicago Tribune''.  There's plenty more
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Actually, I don’t think this fails  ''except'' that the current poor article construction doesn’t hit the standard that ''“Team season articles should consist mainly of well-sourced prose, not just statistics and lists of players. Wikipedia is not a stats directory.”'' But the last line of that section says: “It is strongly recommended that those articles be redirected to the team page if no sourced prose '''can be''' created.” This team was ranked in the top 10 most of the year, went to the NCAA Tournament, and had a highly-publicized regular-season game against Kentucky when both teams were ranked in the top five nationally. Sourced prose absolutely can be created and this isn’t a close case (like a middling team would be). The article needs prose written and sourced, and I am not a big fan of people writing articles and not bothering to demonstrate notability from the start, but I am even less of a fan of articles being deleted as “not notable” if the subject is in fact “notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSEASONS)

Comment: Have any of the delete !voters searched for sources, perhaps ''Sports Illustrated'' or old newspapers? The team was https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/notre-dame/1980-schedule.html ranked in the top-10 most of year.  I'm almost certain there is coverage, especially for a big-time program. Per , {{tq|If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD}}, but that sounds exactly the reason this is being nominated. Failing an SNG is cannot be a sole reason to delete.  Per : {{tq|Failing to meet the criteria in this guideline means that notability will need to be established in other ways (e.g. the general notability guideline
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:NSPORTS)