Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 NAB Challenge

:{{la|2014 NAB Challenge}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2014_NAB_Challenge Stats])

:({{Find sources|2014 NAB Challenge}})

2014 NAB Challenge does not meet notability guidelines

:Delete Prior to 2014 the NAB Cup was a stand-alone pre-season competition which concluded with a Grand Final, with a trophy and prize money awarded. In 2014, the NAB Challenge was changed to a set of practice matches with no winner and no prizes. This gives it no stand-alone notability as a competition, no continuity with previous pre-season competitions, no lasting historical significance, and is therefore an WP:AVOIDSPLIT violation. I go one step further to say that the primary content (the match results) is inconsequential judged on either a stand-alone basis or in the context of the 2014 AFL season, and therefore in my view it should be deleted as a whole from both 2014 NAB Challenge and the parent article 2014 AFL season, and that the most suitable location for pre-season results is the individual club season pages (e.g. 2014 Carlton Football Club season). However, I would say that a valid compromise would be to merge the results into 2014 AFL season, and format the match results in a collapsible table that defaults to the hidden condition; that leaves the content accessible but reflects its lower importance. Aspirex (talk) 08:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• Keep. The Australian Football League pre-season competition has changed formats a number of times over the years. Perhaps it will change back (in which case this will be notable as the odd one out), perhaps it won't (in which case this will be notable as the first season of a new format). It doesn't matter, really - regardless of our personal opinions as to the worth of the competition, it received significant coverage in independent sources. There was a clear distinction between the coverage of the NAB Challenge and the practice matches - for example, statistics were published for the former but not for the latter. StAnselm (talk) 11:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• Keep Has significant coverage, is part of the set of pre-season comp articles, so it belongs in it's own article for categorising rather than hiding in the main season article. Individual club season articles don't exist for all clubs. The-Pope (talk) 15:15, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
• Comment I dispute your assertions that the series has "significant coverage". If you refer to WP:SPORTSEVENT, under bullet point No. 4 it makes reference to determining notability of a game or event as "widely considered by independent reliable sources to be notable, outside routine coverage of each game". In the case of the NAB Challenge, all coverage has been routine; therefore the existence of coverage alone does form the basis of notability. Aspirex (talk) 06:57, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

---

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:27, 14 April 2014 (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.