Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team

: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 2009, delete 2010 and 2011. Wizardman 02:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

=[[2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team]]=

:{{la|2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team}} ([{{fullurl:2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team|wpReason={{urlencode:AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2011 Kansas State Wildcats football team}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they fall under the same category:

:{{la|2010 Kansas State Wildcats football team}}

:{{la|2009 Kansas State Wildcats football team}}

Nominating the article for deletion per WP:CRYSTAL. IMO, a season three years in the future is not appropriate to Wikipedia. — X96lee15 (talk) 04:21, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep Parts of this season have already been determined (namely the schedule)...and that's really all that's there. Other things will be added to it as the season approaches. It's simply a stub right now that will be expanded in upcoming year(s). I see no reason to delete it and there is nothing in this that is speculative.

:Furthermore, WP:CRYSTAL states "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred...In forward-looking articles about...games take special care to avoid advertising and unverified claims...Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place....A schedule of future events may be appropriate if it can be verified." — BQZip01 — talk 05:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Although we know their schedule, is there really anything to be known about it more at this point? I don't see how having simply a verified schedule makes this article sufficient for keeping at this point: let's wait a couple of years, when we know a bit about the people who will compete in the 2011 K-State season, just (as noted by WP:CRYSTAL) as we wait to create an article on Tropical Storm Alberto (2012). Nyttend (talk) 05:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep or Delete or Merge or Neutral yeah, that's no help is it? I quickly see points for all three. Some of the players for the early seasons are already with Kansas State (or your team of choice, as this will have implications through college football). That and the schedule, and the sources for the schedule do seem to indicate at least some notability for the future season, so it is a candidate for keep. But there really is only one reference, and if all there is now is a schedule that is incomplete, that's a candidate for merge. And finally, because the schedules are incomplete (not all games have been announced) and it is in the future which is subject to changes, (as well as not being an "immediate" next season as outlined at CFB:SEASONS) it is a candidate for delete.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:04, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment #1 Personally, I'd rather see editors focus their efforts on past seasons that have information, like 1971 Kansas State Wildcats football team. I think it would be better to work on information that does exist rather than to work on information that is going to exist.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment #2 This discussion can (and I believe should) have implications to other "future season" articles. I say we use this discussion to help firm up consensus on the entire issue.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment #3 Something about future seasons out just doesn't feel right. Not sure what it is yet...--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment #4 Perhaps if all we have is a verified partial schedule on a notable team then we should reference that as "future schedule" from the main team page to the source where it came from and reserve the "future content" for other websites.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Final Answer after thought and review of all the comments here (and again, several valid points on both sides) I landed on delete at this time. I know that there are valid reasons to keep, but this looks to me to be a case where deleting the articles for now seems more appropriate.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Definite Keep on 2009; the way the recruiting game (either commits or transfers) is being played these days, there's plenty of usable information already on some teams. Frankly, once the season begins we're pretty much automatically set on the 2009 articles because we have games that influence the tone of the following season (particularly conference games that repeat year-to-year). I'm neutral on the other seasons, I don't see the harm in their presence, but I personally wouldn't create them. --Bobak (talk) 14:12, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete the articles. The schedule, which may exist at this time, is not the team. Nothing whatsoever is known about the team. Any statement about the team itself is crystal ball gazing. The schedule could be included in a main article on the program Kansas State Wildcats football. Edison (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep on 2009 and Delete on 2010 and 2011. It makes no sense to delete the 2009 season when it will more than likely recreated in January after the 2008 season. As a general rule I personally think editors should wait until after the current season to start the next season. 2010 and 2011 is just to far in the future. Schedules can change, coaches can change, etc. 09er (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep for 2009, delete for the rest. As the rule states, even if we "know" something's going to happen, we don't need to create it yet. 2009 is close enough, but we haven't even begun the 2008 season yet -- there's no reason to begin an article for the rest. Schedules can change, and schedules are the only things with enough cites to be worthy of inclusion in future articles at this time. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep 2009, Delete the rest. We don't know enough about 2010 and 2011, but 2009 should be an acceptable article. Anyway, we'll recreate it in January if it is deleted. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 22:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Another option Merge/redirect this information into Kansas State Wildcats football under a new subheading: Future schedules or something like that. This information is certainly valid within its context and deleting something which will inherently become a full article seems like a colossal waste of time. — BQZip01 — talk 03:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

: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.