From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. King of ♠ 06:32, 27 January 2017 (UTC) reply

PIHA Pro playoffs

PIHA Pro playoffs (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT. Full of redlinks and broken templates. Created as part of a large swath of pages by a single user who has since left. Zackmann08 ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 02:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC) reply

  • I'm neutral on this one. This is about what the playoffs are in general rather than a lot of cruft about specific results. It could be a merge target for what little info in the articles about the specific playoffs is worth keeping and can be reliably referenced. I'm not !voting keep on something completely unreferenced but I'm not !voting delete either as unreferenced stubs are legitimate. I don't hold out great hopes that anybody will want to improve this article but there is no harm in leaving that option open. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 14:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC) reply
  • Merge to Professional Inline Hockey Association, which briefly mentions that they have a playoff. (What sports league doesn't?) That section could be expanded slightly. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 15:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 15:57, 9 January 2017 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk 16:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens ( talk) 18:22, 19 January 2017 (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.