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 no consensus. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bend Elks (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Prod was removed. Reasons: Local junior-league team not meeting guidelines for notability of organizations. Best claim to fame appears to be a player went on to become notable, which does not confer notability. see reply for argument against deletion. tedder (talk) 23:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. -- tedder (talk) 23:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. -- tedder (talk) 23:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not notable. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:CLUB. Not enough notability for its own article yet. However, this kind of subject has a tendency to become notable quickly. I have to ask how many professional players coming out of teams like this would it take to make it notable enough for at least a stub? Zab (talk) 02:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notability for organizations is established if "A ... team ... has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject." I would note that this team has 158 Google news hits from 2008 alone[1] from newspapers that are independent of the team. It should be noted that Google News would only hit on articles that are still online from last summer. Many news articles go offline after a short period of time, so the actual number of articles was probably much larger. Some articles are rather more substantial than just reporting the score of the game such as this one [2]. How is this particular team any less notable than any of the other teams in the category (Category:Amateur baseball teams) or any of the many collegiate summer league teams located in the category's subcategories? Are you planning on putting all of these up for deletion in the near future? If not, it seems as though you are being biased against this one team in relation to the dozens of other teams that are similarly situated. Kinston eagle (talk) 19:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The Bend Bulletin is a very local source. See the Wikipedia:Notability (local interests) proposal. It seems it would be very suitable merged into the league team. As far as "why A not B?", see WP:WAX and WP:OSE. Otherwise, it seems it would fall under WP:CLUB, which says it must meet both the standards of coverage and scope being "national or international in scale", especially the section discussing individual chapters not being notable in themselves. tedder (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think that the concept of "notability" has a bit of subjectivity to it. As User:Kinston_eagle noted, this organization has received a good deal of media coverage about their games which is, I think, enough to warrant an entry. Also, such a move would set a bad precedent of deleting entries against scores of other amateur baseball teams. I don't think that this would be a good move either. (Jeick (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]
• Delete Per WP:CLUB, the first sentence deletes itself.--Giants27 (t|c|r|s) 19:58, 11 May 2009 (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.