Deletion of Monday Night Football all-time team standings

Comment: per , being unsourced and indiscriminate collection of information. Not something one would expect to find in an encyclopedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Listcruft (WP:LISTCRUFT)

Comment: clearly violates #STATS. I agree it can be easily sourced, but this is not a topic for an encyclopedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Here is the apparently applicable portion of : ''"Excessive listings of statistics. Any statistics should be accompanied by explanatory text providing context. Long recitations of statistics reduce readability and may be confusing. Where large quantities of statistics are appropriate (e.g. Nationwide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2012) consider placing them in tables to enhance readability; where large quantities are not appropriate (e.g. the main article United States presidential election, 2012) omit excess statistics and summarize."'' Readability is not reduced and the article is not confusing. Perhaps there could be more explanatory text, but the solution to that is to write more text, not to delete the article. Furthermore, as recommended, the stats are contained in a well-organized table. Upon examination of the policy given as grounds for deletion, I find that the actual policy itself does not support deletion in this instance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSTATS)

Comment: per , . The article is ''pure'' trivia, nothing more. (talk page stalker
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:TRIVIA||WP:NOTSTATS)

Comment: clearly it needs sourcing, but sources are readily available in a very large amount of third party media sources.  Passes  easily
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)