Evolution of Basketball Shoes: I'm suggesting deletion based on WP:NOTESSAY , WP:NPOV , and WP:OR .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:56, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:56, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep- Could be improved to meet Wikipedia standards.  PaulGamerBoy360 ( talk ) 17:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I think an alternative to deletion would be better here.  Along with the two already cited, I can find a few general sources [1] [2] [3] on evolution/history of basketball shoes, a lot of focus on NBA signature shoes, and there are other articles on history of specific players' shoes like Jordan's or Lebrons'.  Portions that aren't already mentioned could be merged into the history section of Sneakers .  Whether we need a split Basketball Shoe article before a history of basketball shoes, or if this should be a "History of Sneakers" in general instead is another discussion.  It might be better to work on this on a draft to decide what it should be, and whether it would just suffice in another article.  WikiVirus C (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  I agree with the WP:NOTESSAY argument.  -- MuZemike 01:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment It's not an inherently bad idea for an article.  There is a lot of meat to this topic.  I'm surprised we don't even have a dedicated basketball shoe page.  (That link is just a redirect.)  Yes, the article would need some work to fit modern Wiki standards, but I think there's potential here.  Maybe move to draft space?  Zagal e jo ( talk ) 00:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : as to tone, afd is not cleanup.  The article uses some poor sources (non-independent sources + self published sources including substack posts), but there is enough to establish notability apart from them.  Should be renamed to History of basketball shoes , though.  small jars t c 15:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Ah, an old timey style wikipedia article that isn't sourced, but that has too much info to be fake news.  I'd BLAR and TNT.  I suppose we could make something out of this, but none of the sources used are good enough as a starting point.  Would seem to be an exercise in futility.  We'd have to draftify and hope someone adopts the stub.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per above, OR/SYNTH essay, if there is a notable topic here (I think there is), this will need TNT to make room for it, most of the article.  // Timothy :: talk 15:13, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify per above SYNTH/ESSAY concerns.   I believe there is some level of notability to this topic and parts of the article in its current state can be used if properly sourced, and this can eventually be resubmitted at AFC, preferably under a new title.  Frank Anchor 18:47, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge any relevant content into the "History" section of Sneakers per WikiVirusC, and convert this into a redirect.  CycloneYoris talk!  00:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 10:31, 5 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist to decide between Keep, Delete, Merge or Draftify.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:33, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify Topic may have some merit, but that can be decided later at AfC.  Personally I’d prefer a section in basketball shoe written in summary style, but I’m voting draftify rather than merge to give the editing community a chance to improve it.  RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 19:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Per WP:NOTESSAY and as others have suggested this could possibly trip over SYNTH and OR as well.  -- TheInsatiableOne ( talk ) 08:19, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I was going to move the article to use sentence case per MOS, but I’m not sure if it would interfere with the debate.  I don’t think so, but it’s best to be sure… RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 19:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A badly conceived content fork.  There's a kernel for a worthy page here but this work is quite malformed and way SYNTHY.  Not the place to start a draft, IMHO.  BusterD ( talk ) 13:57, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : agree that it's best to start over, rather than send back to AfC.  Arbitrarily0 ( talk ) 09:43, 22 May 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete