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 merge to
2003 Carolina Panthers season. The consensus about exactly where to merge to is not particularly strong and there is one suggestion to keep the page and rework into a disambig. The discussion on how to proceed can continue on the article's talk page.
ATraintalk 07:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Merge content and delete. Merge the useful content into
2003 Carolina Panthers season. These two articles cover precisely the same subject. It is detrimental to have the information split into two articles.
Cbl62 (
talk) 20:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete No need for a stand alone article on this and far too generic and has been a nickname for many teams and there's even several it could be used for that it hasn't been ever used. Maybe a brief note in respective season pages but that's about it.--Rockchalk717 04:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment. What about the possibility of converting this into a disambiguation page and listing out the various teams that claim this name there (
2003 Carolina Panthers season,
2010 LSU Tigers football team, etc.)? Would there be any point, or would it be too difficult to police which teams are actually worth putting there? I can see a scenario where any team that has a feline mascot and plays a random exciting game gets tossed in there. Probably not worth the trouble.
Ejgreen77 (
talk) 05:30, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Then we'd might as well list every team with a feline mascot, because it's more likely than not that such a team was referred to as the Cardiac Cats at least once.
Lizard (
talk) 05:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Right, we'd have to have some sort of a litmus test to determine what actually would be worth listing here, and attempt to avoid just casual mentions throwing the phrase around. Probably a pain in the neck to police. I'm just thinking about things to possibly do here, because if this is deleted and not locked down, I guarantee you something else will get created here.
Ejgreen77 (
talk) 05:57, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Oh well. If that happens we'll deal with it again.
Lizard (
talk) 10:11, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
TonyBallioni (
talk) 05:23, 23 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. The nickname is too common to be an article for one particular team. --
Metropolitan90(talk) 05:26, 23 October 2017 (UTC)reply
But I have no objection to a merge of the content if others want to do that. --
Metropolitan90(talk) 12:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Merge content and delete. Even if the nickname's too common to work for one particular team, if the content of the article contains useful information on one particular team, I see no reason to waste it all.
Nick012000 (
talk) 09:14, 23 October 2017 (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.
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 merge to
2003 Carolina Panthers season. The consensus about exactly where to merge to is not particularly strong and there is one suggestion to keep the page and rework into a disambig. The discussion on how to proceed can continue on the article's talk page.
ATraintalk 07:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Merge content and delete. Merge the useful content into
2003 Carolina Panthers season. These two articles cover precisely the same subject. It is detrimental to have the information split into two articles.
Cbl62 (
talk) 20:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete No need for a stand alone article on this and far too generic and has been a nickname for many teams and there's even several it could be used for that it hasn't been ever used. Maybe a brief note in respective season pages but that's about it.--Rockchalk717 04:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment. What about the possibility of converting this into a disambiguation page and listing out the various teams that claim this name there (
2003 Carolina Panthers season,
2010 LSU Tigers football team, etc.)? Would there be any point, or would it be too difficult to police which teams are actually worth putting there? I can see a scenario where any team that has a feline mascot and plays a random exciting game gets tossed in there. Probably not worth the trouble.
Ejgreen77 (
talk) 05:30, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Then we'd might as well list every team with a feline mascot, because it's more likely than not that such a team was referred to as the Cardiac Cats at least once.
Lizard (
talk) 05:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Right, we'd have to have some sort of a litmus test to determine what actually would be worth listing here, and attempt to avoid just casual mentions throwing the phrase around. Probably a pain in the neck to police. I'm just thinking about things to possibly do here, because if this is deleted and not locked down, I guarantee you something else will get created here.
Ejgreen77 (
talk) 05:57, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Oh well. If that happens we'll deal with it again.
Lizard (
talk) 10:11, 17 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
TonyBallioni (
talk) 05:23, 23 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Delete. The nickname is too common to be an article for one particular team. --
Metropolitan90(talk) 05:26, 23 October 2017 (UTC)reply
But I have no objection to a merge of the content if others want to do that. --
Metropolitan90(talk) 12:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Merge content and delete. Even if the nickname's too common to work for one particular team, if the content of the article contains useful information on one particular team, I see no reason to waste it all.
Nick012000 (
talk) 09:14, 23 October 2017 (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.