1884 Wabash football team: The only source in the article gives this team merely a brief mention, and a cursory search didn't come up with anything better.  Let'srun ( talk ) 01:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: American football and Indiana .  Let'srun ( talk ) 01:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  The article was created as a sub-stub almost 10 years ago with a single sentence -- "The 1884 Wabash Little Giants football team represented Wabash College during the 1884 college football season."  The only addition since then has been a notation that the "Little Giants" nickname wasn't adopted until 20 years ago.  Nothing of encyclopedic value is lost by deleting this.  Cbl62 ( talk ) 03:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Per the article having been a WP:STUB for 9 years, and only having one citation.  Mjks28 ( talk ) 14:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  These are not reasons for deletion.  For that reason, the person closing the discussion will unfortunately not take your stated opinion into regard, so please feel free to revise - and please read WP:DISCUSSAFD first.  Geschichte ( talk ) 07:15, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I think only having one citation qualifies as a reason, no?  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If the single citation had sufficient depth, it might be OK, but the source presented here lacks the needed depth.  Cbl62 ( talk ) 15:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - All material is included in the Wabash College article.  Leaving a redirect would be a painless courtesy.  Carrite ( talk ) 21:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: It's true that being a Stub article is not a reason to delete an article.  We have thousands and thousands of stub articles.  Relisting to see if there is support for Rediretion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  01:11, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions .  North America 1000 15:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The actual and valid reasons for deletion here are set forth in the nom: The article lacks anything remotely resembling WP:SIGCOV and thus plainly fails both WP:GNG and WP:NSEASONS .  As for redirecting, that would undermine the utility of red link in our comprehensive system of team templates.  E.g., Template:Wabash Little Giants football navbox .  A redlink tells us that a season article does not exist.  We could theoretically fill in all of those redlinks with redirects, but then the utility of the templates is massively undercut and we end up with team templates that are a useless loop redirecting to the main team article.  (A minor program like Wabash (Division III!) has very few notable seasons, and the blue links in the template allow the viewer to zero in on those seasons. )  Please do not redirect.  Cbl62 ( talk ) 15:46, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Wabash football, 1884–1889 .  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 16:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] A merge can't be closed to a target which doesn't currently exist.  Also, would that target meet the notability guidelines (GNG and NSEASONS)?  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Let'srun, my assumption is that yes, that target would meet notability guidelines.  It would be more productive for you to examine such possibilities before creating an AfD like this.  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 21:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] my assumption is that yes, that target would meet notability guidelines We would need more than an assumption.  Can you provide a couple sources?  Cbl62 ( talk ) 21:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Cbl62, you how to answer this question for yourself.  See: 1889 Indiana Hoosiers football team .  There's lots of other stuff on Newspapers.com.  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 21:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Unless someone wants to take the time to create a well-sourced redirect target, redirect is not an available or permissible option here.  For that reason, I remain in the "delete" camp.  Cbl62 ( talk ) 22:39, 29 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] We need an existing target article, not a hypothetical one that could be created in the future.  L iz Read!  Talk!  02:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Wabash football, 1884–1889 has been created.  More coverage can be found, but search at Newspapers.com via Wikipedia Library is currently down.  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 03:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to the proposed decade target on the assumption Wabash is a football team we care about the seasons for.  There's not enough available for this season to have a stand-alone article, there's not even that much to merge, but it's better to maintain a complete set of the information somewhere using the guidance at WP:NSEASONS which allows multiple seasons to be smushed into one.  SportingFlyer T · C 17:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] What info still needs to be merged?  I think if anything a redirect would suffice.  Let'srun ( talk ) 20:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The single game result can be included somewhere.  SportingFlyer T · C 20:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It already is under 1884, no?  Let'srun ( talk ) 20:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As with the other AfD, I didn't notice the merge had already happened.  SportingFlyer T · C 21:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Wabash football, 1884–1889 (there's nothing to merge, it's already there).  Thanks to User:Jweiss11 for creating a suitable target article.  Cbl62 ( talk ) 21:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Wabash football, 1884–1889 since the season article does not appear to be notable enough for standalone inclusion.  Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:28, 3 July 2024 (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: merge