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.
First, they used to be a top tier team before 2008. Second, I am not sure why you continue to maintain there are no independent sources after I explained to you why all sources are independent of the team.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
19:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
It's an organization (club) - see
WP:ORGDEPTH which this organization fails, particularly Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization. I've looked at the sources and translated the information, and what I've seen falls under except works carrying merely trivial coverage, such as: - it is also a defunct organization. If I see sources that convince me otherwise, I will not hesitate to withdraw the nom. Atsme📞📧20:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Actually, the sources are clearly independent of the team (the sources are the Russian Bandy federation and the main bandy internet portal in Russia), and the article must be kept, but I just added two more sources (major Russian sports portals, not specifically bandy-related).--
Ymblanter (
talk)
19:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
My point exactly: An independent source is a source that has no vested interest in a given Wikipedia topic and therefore is commonly expected to cover the topic from a disinterested perspective.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
20:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
This is about the same as removing from the articles of the Olympians references to IOC protocols because IOC may want some of them to succeed. Or removing from the articles on performers of classical music sources in journals specialized on classical music. Such understading of
WP:GNG goes completely counter to the established practice.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
22:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
No...the Olympic competition is world-wide and the athletes who compete typically have won numerous national championships. There is no comparison. Atsme📞📧23:04, 16 February 2018 (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.
First, they used to be a top tier team before 2008. Second, I am not sure why you continue to maintain there are no independent sources after I explained to you why all sources are independent of the team.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
19:48, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
It's an organization (club) - see
WP:ORGDEPTH which this organization fails, particularly Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization. I've looked at the sources and translated the information, and what I've seen falls under except works carrying merely trivial coverage, such as: - it is also a defunct organization. If I see sources that convince me otherwise, I will not hesitate to withdraw the nom. Atsme📞📧20:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Actually, the sources are clearly independent of the team (the sources are the Russian Bandy federation and the main bandy internet portal in Russia), and the article must be kept, but I just added two more sources (major Russian sports portals, not specifically bandy-related).--
Ymblanter (
talk)
19:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
My point exactly: An independent source is a source that has no vested interest in a given Wikipedia topic and therefore is commonly expected to cover the topic from a disinterested perspective.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
20:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
This is about the same as removing from the articles of the Olympians references to IOC protocols because IOC may want some of them to succeed. Or removing from the articles on performers of classical music sources in journals specialized on classical music. Such understading of
WP:GNG goes completely counter to the established practice.--
Ymblanter (
talk)
22:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)reply
No...the Olympic competition is world-wide and the athletes who compete typically have won numerous national championships. There is no comparison. Atsme📞📧23:04, 16 February 2018 (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.