Deletion of Major League Baseball blackout policy

Comment: Sourcing is possible, as demonstrated by Secret's link above and short GNews searches (http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22major+league+baseball%22+%22blackout+policy%22&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&num=100&hl=en&scoring=a http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22major+league+baseball%22+%22blackout+rules%22&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&num=100&hl=en&scoring=a). Simply because no one has done it until now does not mean the article should be deleted. See  and  which both say that any article that can be improved through editing is ineligible for deletion (based on those concerns). Regards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD||WP:BEFORE)

Comment: and stop defending the article for it to be deleted, sourcing does exist for the policy, being unreferenced isn't a reason for deletion unless no references can be sourced, or the references are too local where #NEWS applies, unreliable, or passing mentions
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: There are no sources.  According to erifiability#Burden_of_evidence the burden of evidence lies in the editor that added the material.  Since they clearly have not provided the sources it most certainly qualifies for deletion.  The material was challenged two years ago through the use of a tag and it was not responded to and the issue was not fixed, hence the burden of evidence has not been met.  Additionally, according to that same page:  "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed, but how quickly this should happen depends on the material and the overall state of the article. Editors might object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. It has always been good practice to make reasonable efforts to find sources yourself that support such material, and cite them."  The editors have been given ample time.  Additionally, I searched for reliable sources and was not able to find any in regards to the majority of the article.  Furthermore, Wikipedia policy states that material that fails to be verified can be deleted.  Proper process was followed requesting sources, none were added... it can and should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: Definitely notable subject. Last I checked, we didn't have a |deadline on articles. Cleanup requests aren't a valid reason to delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:There is no deadline (WP:DEADLINE)