Talk:Columbus Destroyers

message: Discuss whether the 2019 version should be considered its own entity as it was announced as in expansion team originally that just happens to share the same name (WP:NOTPAPER means GNG can met for either topic) or a "relaunch" of the defunct team because the league chose to use a known name. Yosemiter (talk) 17:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: So your vote is Merge then. That's fine. But there is always a marketing aspect to "re-launches". I personally have no opinion here (same league and such, they owned the rights to the name as far as I can tell.) But per WP:MERGE, it should be discussed and held for about one week to allow for others input. Then the two pages can be merged properly and not have two articles with duplicate content. So please do not be hasty with the edits, we have a few weeks before the team plays and it should be settled before that. Thank you, Yosemiter (talk) 18:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep.  That's my vote.  This is different than the Orlando Predators, which I will agree with since the new expansion team in the National Arena League is going to be different from the original AFL team for obvious reasons.  Yet, the fans there will always maintain that they will be one in the same.  Though I stand with my argument that the Portland Steel and Portland Thunder are separate franchises (different owners) even though the article has them one in the same.  But it was a different time back then.  NostalgiaBuff97501 (talk) 18:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: And in a week, if there either no opposition or a consensus to merge, then the page will be merged. No harm done. But sometimes people have opinions and since you put the merge discussion template up, we should allow the time for others to be heard. The AFL (and all lower than NFL football teams really) are a mishmash or styles, like New Orleans VooDoo (two completely separate franchises on one page because the shared a name). Then you have organizations like the National Gridiron League (United States), which is half re-used logos and trying to advertise as relaunches (like this). Yosemiter (talk) 19:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: ArenaFan confirmed that the Destroyers will be adopting the "history/records etc" of the original Columbus Destroyers team that played from 2004-2008. I would also assume that would also carry over the old Buffalo Destroyers records as well? Regardless, this basically affirms the pages should be merged. Source: ArenaFan Tweet. Hawkahaulic08 (talk) 22:56, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  While ArenaFan is decent source for information, they are not directly involved in the league as it is a fan-run site (hence the name). So what is considered there is mostly irrelevant as "official". However, the league does appear to be putting all their efforts in calling this a re-launch and that does matter. Yosemiter (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Even Matthew Sauk has implied that it is a continuation of the original franchise. I wouldn't consider Tim Capper as irrelevant when he said the sources confirmed it (especially when it looks like the AFL is promoting ArenaFan more), but that's up to you.Hawkahaulic08 (talk) 23:52, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

text: Strong merge. All indications are that this is a revival, which is actually normal for the AFL regarding pre-bankruptcy/post-bankruptcy teams (see: Predators, Cleveland Gladiators, Tampa Bay Storm, Philadelphia Soul, Utah Blaze). J. Myrle Fuller (talk)  15:07, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  it's the same team but it's different. Let's merge. YortchMx (talk) 02:58, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge with Columbus Destroyers (2019–)