Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toronto Legacy

: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The result was speedy keep: nominator has withdrawn his nomination, and no other editors favor deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 15:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

=[[Toronto Legacy]]=

:{{la|Toronto Legacy}} ([{{fullurl:Toronto Legacy|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toronto Legacy}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. A proposed sports team which is completely unsolicited should not have its own page on here. If there is ever a planned expansion of the NHL then I would say, sure, let the proposed teams have their own page. This bid will likely be shut down in the following weeks as even the proponents of this team said they wouldn't take their cause to the courts and quickly give up. That means this team is a blip on the radar screen.George Pelltier (talk) 20:24, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Oppose - The article is about the proposal, nothing more. It's too early to delete. The group is entirely serious, so it is your opinion that they will disappear. In any event, there may be a better place for the article information. Alaney2k (talk) 21:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

::Merge is most appropriate. Alaney2k (talk) 15:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete. I would say to merge this into Andrew Lopez, but the main player in this bid is not himself notable enough for an article. I agree with the concept behind the nomination - there's nothing right now that says this is anything more than a single press conference. With more context, it will be easier to see where this information should wind up - an article on Lopez, an article on the Hamilton team as a sidenote on its relocation, a stand-alone article - but at this point, there's nothing out there talking about the prospective team, other than coverage of the press conference, and there's certainly not enough out there to warrant an article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

:CommentAgree that it shou,d be merged with one of the main backers of this team proposal. Probably Andrew Lopez. One press conference does not warrant a Wikipedia article. That is a very good point.George Pelltier (talk) 21:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Merge and redirect to Potential National Hockey League expansion. It's hard to argue for a delete given the mention in reliable sources already: [http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/postedsports/archive/2009/06/04/mystery-group-touts-nhl-expansion-for-toronto-claims-1-billion-in-war-chest.aspx], [http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/645491], [http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/646049], [http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Toronto+Legacy+plan+includes+seat+arena/1667679/story.html], [http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/postedsports/archive/2009/06/05/the-toronto-legacy-an-nhl-team-in-the-making-probably-not.aspx], [http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=280969], though it might be a bit too early for a separate article. We can look at separating the proposal back out if this becomes more than a brief news story. Resolute 23:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. —Resolute 23:34, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge, preserving redirect to Potential National Hockey League expansion#Toronto. Looking at the other potential clubs listed there, the Legacy is in keeping with the scope of that article. —C.Fred (talk) 23:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge to the articles above. If it ever becomes official, obviously the article can be separated. Patken4 (talk) 00:20, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge to the potential list.--Lvivske (talk) 01:06, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge to Potential National Hockey League expansion which was pretty much created for situations like this. The group hasn't even talked to the NHL so not only have they not yet got a franchise...they haven't even applied for one. -Djsasso (talk) 03:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment I removed the nomination for deletion on the page so the article can be merged with another more fitting article.George Pelltier (talk) 09:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
  • That is not correct procedure. Wait until consensus has been determined (and I don't see why the template must be removed to facilitate a merge anyway). Powers T 13:58, 6 June 2009 (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.