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 delete. Sr13 04:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Non-notable building that lacks "significant coverage by independent sources". All the hits in a
google news archive search are trivial
Corpx 16:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Hi, Corpx, you seem to be on a number of these and I've been off Wikipedia for a few months, so just as a quick question, what sources count as trivial and don't? Thanks! And yes, I think we should keep the article, because it is overal presented well, has a large number of diverse groups that use it, seems to be a good sized building, has a number of notable corporate sponsors, etc. I agree, however, that more news style/article links should be added as well. Have there been any incidents at the building that made the news that could increase notability? Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 16:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Trivial coverage is saying "Event x will happen at Court Time Sports Center @ 9:30PM". To be notable, an article must be about the Sports Center or mention it "significantly".
Corpx 16:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete, major claim to notability being a practice facility for a minor-league team is not persuasive. For comparison, I haven't written an article yet on my local ice arena, but it was a preferred practice facility for several Olympic skaters before the
Pettit Center opened. That's at least a reasonable stab at notability. --
Dhartung |
Talk 23:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete. Fails
WP:N because of lack of
reliable sources. I suspect that few or no such facilities are notable enough for inclusion in WP.
Deor 01:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete NN facility. Greatest claim to notability is being the practice facility of a minor league sports team.
Caknuck 14:17, 13 July 2007 (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.