Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports calendar March 2007

: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. Stifle (talk) 14:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

=[[Sports calendar March 2007]]=

:{{la|Sports calendar March 2007}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports calendar March 2007}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{findsources|Sports calendar March 2007}})

Redundant to March 2007 in sports. WOSlinker (talk) 21:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Delete, no reason to have multiple articles on the same topic. Nyttend (talk) 03:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak keep I don't know which is worse, having an article where March begins in February, or a WP:NOT#NEWS article that lists the events of a month in reverse order (in this case, a backward march-- 31 March, 30 March, 29 March, etc.). This one seems to be the lesser of two evils, in that it's heavy on sources, takes up a lot less space (9,764 bytes vs. a ridiculous 79,699, and it doesn't look like an editor copying scores off of the sports section every morning. For some reason, this one is nominated and the other isn't. Mandsford (talk) 12:49, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 09:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Merge This is the best list out of all of them. So defiantly merge and redirect this article. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 15:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Delete as the creation entirely novel list topics contravene the prohibition on original research as illustrated by WP:MADEUP. As far as I can see, this list, or anything like it, has not be been published anywhere except within Wikipedia, so there is no evidence that it is verifiable, let alone notable. To demonstrate that this topic was not created based on editor's own idea, a verifiable definition is needed to provide external validation that this list complies with content policy. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 12:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 09:48, 28 April 2010 (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.