Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2014–15_Turkish_Basketball_League References

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. Paul Erik ^{(talk)
(contribs)} 16:59, 30 June 2014 (UTC) reply

2014–15 Turkish Basketball League

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Articles about notable games should have well-sourced prose, not merely a list of stats. Regular season games in professional and college leagues are not inherently notable." WP:SPORTSEVENT Alans1977 ( talk) 09:39, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment can nominees please point to areas of Wikipedia rules that they think are being infringed so as to help other users come to judgements on the relevance of the comments. Gregkaye ( talk) 09:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Alans1977 ( talk) 09:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Alans1977 ( talk) 09:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Basketball-related deletion discussions. Alans1977 ( talk) 09:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Alans1977 ( talk) 09:55, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are not notable. Many of them reading as propaganda for one team and many of them lacking any sources at all (only templates). The remainder are simply lists of all teams wins/loses/draws and diagrams of how finals played out. As per WP:SPORTSEVENT "Articles about notable games should have well-sourced prose, not merely a list of stats. Regular season games in professional and college leagues are not inherently notable.":

Please note I also nominated 2013–14 Turkish Basketball League for deletion yesterday. Before I read a bit more and found this way to nominate multiple pages. Deletion entry is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2013–14 Turkish Basketball League Alans1977 ( talk) 10:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

What exactly is the problem? Almost all season articles on Wikipedia just contain statistics, those can definitely be improved but why do they have to be deleted? Also, I think the articles are really notable/important because this way all people can follow the Turkish league without having to learn Turkish language. -- H-Hurry ( talk) 12:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi, if English speakers wanted to follow the Turkish league they could easily do so at a website such as http://www.tblstat.net/ (the first link Google spat at me when I entered 'Turkish basketball league'). As far as the inclusion of seasons in Wikipedia, that's a different story. The season are not notable and there's quite a few of them that are only templates with no information in them. Then there are others that read as propaganda for specific teams. All in all, not notable. Alans1977 ( talk) 13:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment I personally don't think it should be possible for Noms to be able to place a { {subst:afd1} } tag on an article before another WP:TEMP tag has already been attached because this would give readers some kind of idea of standards expected and guidance available. This is in no way a comment on my view of the criticism expressed but I've still got no idea what aspect of the rules apply ... and neither, I suspect, do they. Gregkaye ( talk) 17:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Some of them have been sitting there as templates for years. Additionally even if those ones that are still templates had information filled into them, as per WP:SPORTSEVENT "Articles about notable games should have well-sourced prose, not merely a list of stats. Regular season games in professional and college leagues are not inherently notable." Alans1977 ( talk) 03:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I am also nominating the following related pages because the event which is covered in that page is already covered in Turkish Basketball Championship and the event is not notable enough to justify its own page:

Delete for the reason listed above. Akocsg ( talk) 18:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Keep Splitting the cup in half is a notable action - so the article should stay. It is also clearly a match-fixing. http://www.thepfa.com/members/betting/matchfixing

Another Fenerbahce fan boy wants to delete the articles I created. https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kullan%C4%B1c%C4%B1:Akocsg LardoBalsamico ( talk) 00:39, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment Consider this a warning, stop personally attacking other users! Calling another user a "fan boy" is an attack. This article is totally superfluous, as this incident is mentioned already in the Turkish Basketball Championship article. Plus your repeated labelling of this incident as match-fixing, even though this clearly has nothing to do with it, shows that your ar on a POV-pushing mission and unwilling of contributing contructively. Akocsg ( talk) 03:43, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Superfluous? According to whom? You? Yes it is match-fixing! It' s not only a withdrawal! It is based on puropse! What purpose? If Fenerbahce officials would not withdraw their teams, who would have been the champion? Galatasaray. If they would? Modaspor! Then it was based on purpose! Then it is match-fixing not only a withdrawal! You already know that. LardoBalsamico ( talk) 06:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

The 1955 Turkish basketball withdrawal incident is one paragraph of information already covered in Turkish Basketball Championship. It is not notable enough for an article by itself. All other arguments of match fixing or not are irrelevant. Alans1977 ( talk) 11:17, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

"not notable enough"? What is your notability scale? The wiki admin said it's notable but you are saying not notable enough? Maybe your "dear friend", Akocsg, might help you. You know he wanted you to nominate this article? Didn't he? LardoBalsamico ( talk) 11:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Personal attacks? Really? For your information I don't even know Akocsg and I almost didn't nominate the article just because he made a point of asking me to nominate it. I would say it's certainly notable enough information to include in the Turkish Basketball Championship article. To have its own article is just ridiculous when it is 1 - 2 paragraphs. Alans1977 ( talk) 11:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Just cool down. "The wiki admin said it's notable but you are saying not notable enough?" Please answer the question first? You do know notability but admin don't. And you all know it. LardoBalsamico ( talk) 12:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

So a wiki admin said it was notable enough for it's own article separate from Turkish Basketball Championship? I highly doubt it. Alans1977 ( talk) 12:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Keep all. Articles about the seasons should be improved, not deleted. The single-game article about the 1955 incident might warrant separate consideration, but not in this bundled environment. — C.Fred ( talk) 18:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

The seasons could easily be incorporated into the page Turkish Basketball Championship. Alans1977 ( talk) 11:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

So, where should we continue our discussion of deleting the article 1955 Turkish basketball withdrawal incident or not? Rivaner ( talk) 06:11, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

It's one of the articles I've nominated for deletion on this page. So this is probably a good place to discuss it if you have something you want to say. Alans1977 ( talk) 11:14, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Well, I am going to repeat my earlier comment which I think got lost in all the discussion.I have to say Delete to the 1955 Turkish basketball withdrawal incident. If you look at when it got created and also when it entered the Turkish Basketball Championship article (both by the same user), you will that there is 3 year difference between them. Also if you check this diff from another article and also it's creation date, you will see why there is a 3 years of difference between two articles.Unfortunetly the said user's edits are not made with encyclopedic intentions. I have a history with the user who made these edits (which, if you want, you can check on admins noticeboard) and this is one of the many reasons we have a history. Thanks for your time. Rivaner ( talk) 13:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

~~Delete~~ No one had given good reason why all the individual pages that I've nominated for deletion should stay. I think if anyone feels the information in those pages should be preserved they should merge into Turkish Basketball Championship. Alans1977 ( talk) 12:57, 25 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I've struck the duplicate !vote above. The nomination itself is the delete !vote. However, feel free to comment all you'd like. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Keep Lets see the article repaired; not deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prizby ( talk • contribs) 14:10, 25 June 2014 (UTC) reply
Keep Sorry, but this nominate is so ridiculous. I can't understand why you just nominate articles about Turkish basketball. Did you examine an article about any season of any European league? They including same templates, same informations. Season articles including play-off matches, coaches, arenas, league tables, match scores etc. so this is notable thing I think. I'm a Turkish basketball fan, and I'm trying to improve Turkish basketball articles with right news and informations. After last final series in Turkey, some users edited this articles with away from objectivity. It's normal. But you can't delete this article for just this reason. JoeyFredy ( talk) 14:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

These were the articles I came accross. Saying there are many like these from my point of view is not an argument for keeping these but deleting the others. These pages are mere compilations of stats and could easily be merged into Turkish Basketball Championship. Alans1977 ( talk) 10:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Sorry, but I think these pages can't merge into any article. Can you give me an example for it? Turkish Basketball League isn't a minor league in Europe, do you know? A lot of people in Europe follow this league, and of course they need these pages. JoeyFredy ( talk) 10:45, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Keep; reasonings are arguments for clean-ups, not deletions. If all of these articles will be merged into one article, it would necessitate a WP:SPLIT discussion. Sports league seasons articles are generally notable. Now for other incidents, perhaps a good sourcing will be in order; if no one can find one, then delete. – H T D 02:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply
Keep - One of the worst nominees i have ever seen around here. It's a notable sports league, with notable teams/players. It contains a league table, results, playoff results, stats and links. So, where is the problem? You DO now that there are season articles for nearly every kind of sport? Kante4 ( talk) 21:49, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply
Keep, the nomination rationale is totally bogus. The guideline quoted is for articles about individual games, not whole seasons. Professional league seasons are almost always notable. Yes, the articles need some prose, but that isn't a reason for deletion. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 08:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC) reply

This discussion for deletion has been going for almost 7 days now and despite plenty of people saying this is more of an argument for improvement than deletion no one has added anything to make these pages anything more than mere collections of stats. As per WP:NSEASONS "Team season articles should consist mainly of well-sourced prose, not just statistics and lists of players. Wikipedia is not a stats directory. It is strongly recommended that those articles be redirected to the team page if no sourced prose can be created." Precisely because these pages are collections of stats they are un-notable. Alans1977 ( talk) 09:49, 30 June 2014 (UTC) reply

And you are the only one who wants to delete those articles. I've seen 6-7 "keep" votes so far, so it's as clear as it gets. Kante4 ( talk) 15:00, 30 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I'd like to imagine that references exist (like come on, game summaries, at least for the most recent seasons, should be quite easy to find, right?), only that nobody has made them yet. – H T D 16:51, 30 June 2014 (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.