Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Carolina Tigers

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 of the debate was merge. — Mar. 15, '06 [17:06] <freakofnur_xture|talk>

North Carolina Tigers

My first reaction when I saw this thing on Newpages was - this is very, very non-notable, possibly a speedy, but then I looked around in the stub categories which were all in the same boat, so this may be a litmus-test for similar AFL related teams - WP:AFL.

Australian Rules Football (Australian Football League) is a sport which basically exclusive to Australia. To the best of my knowledge, there is no "world cup" for this sport - but if there is, perhaps Australia does not participate due to an exemption (because it would turn into a monumental mismatch). There is no International Competition in this sport that Australia takes part in. Australia is the only country with a professional league, and even though there are roughly (16 teams * 40 players in a squad = 640 players). In the whole history of AFL competition, there have only been 5-10 non-Australians (all from Ireland) who have reached the AFL - "top 600" (in the 100 years of the sport existing) so to speak. Thus I feel that an amateur club in the United States domestic competition, a country which has NOT produced ANY players who have reached a professional level is not notable. Similar articles for many domestic AMATEUR teams in the Canadian league have also been created. Generally speaking, AFL is only known in Canada and the United States due to Australian expatriates who play recreationally on weekends.

This is similar toPortal:Cricket where the Canadian cricket team competed in the 2003 Cricket World Cup with a team of mostly dual citizens from Australia, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, who did not even live in Canada, was lead by John Davison who spent most of his time sitting on the bench in Australia for the domestic team, Southern Redbacks. As domestic Canadian cricket teams basically consist of a few expats having a social game on Sundays followed by a beer, thereby not warranting an article, I feel that Canadian and American based AFL teams should also not warrant an article, as the lack of international competition (no world cup) indicates that the level of AFL is very, very, very non-notable outside of Australia (much more so than cricket). I think the necessary information should be in "AFL in Canada" and "AFL in USA".Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ The fact that AFL is played in the USA is noteworthy. Remember that Rugby Union was introduced to France by English ex-pats who have had many many years in which to regret it. <--die Baumfabrik 04:09, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - The existence of AFL in America is noteworthy, and has an article, but this is about a club in a country where NOBODY has reached the professional level, in a sport which does not have a "WORLD CUP/CHAMPIONSHIPS" because only one country plays it to any meaningful standard.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Does the Australian Football International Cup count? --Scott Davis ^Talk 12:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm inclined to not think much of it if Australia is excluded - probably as a "mercy rule" on the other national teams. I remember a sport report on it last year, and the sports anchor on Ten's Sports Tonight made a lot of editorializing which lampooned the visiting international teams - judging by the bits that they showed in the report, the standard of play looked even clumsier than my old high school team.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 23:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, well put. Mak emi 04:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I would vote to merge into AFL in the United States because I consider that that topic is worthy of an article. However, I think for an article on individual club teams would not meet our notability standards. Capitalistroadster 05:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The relevant articles are AFL Canada and United States Australian Football League. At the moment, all 15 Canadian and only 2 of the US teams have an article. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I will vote to merge with the United States Australian Football League. Capitalistroadster 05:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 05:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)" .[reply]
Merge with United States Australian Football League. --Martyman-(talk) 05:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as Martyman suggests. I change my vote above. --die Baumfabrik 06:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Capitalistroadster. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 06:21, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Australia plays against Ireland occasionly in a mash btwn Aussie Rules and Gaelic Football. --Midnighttonight 07:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I know that, but that is a "hybrid sport" and a lot of the players decline being selected for their country, which indicates that it is not a particularly serious event.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 07:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with United States Australian Football League]. Of course, articles named "AFL in the United States" should not exist, as it should be Australian rules football in the United States. JPD (talk) 10:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Capitalroadster. Thatcher131 12:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Capitlalistroadster. Just zis Guy you know? 13:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I'm sorry if it's not of importance, merging it would be the best idea I think. BobbyAFC 22:17, 8 March 2006 (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.