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.
Weak keep - The
List of ESPN College Football personalities is a different list that does not contain the Basketball broadcast teams. Teams on ESPN meet the General notability guideline.--
23mason (
talk) 16:27, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
KEEP Its a valid list. You can also merge the other list to this one. The way this one is arranged is far more useful for sorting information.
DreamFocus 20:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Listcruft and the entire topic (broadcaster teams through history) isn't discussed significantly be reliable sources. « Gonzo fan2007(talk) @ 20:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete Wikipedia is not a database. Due to its size, this grouping of articles is better handled as a category.--
Paul McDonald (
talk) 20:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep Valid and useful list which does contain some independent references although the variety of reference sources could be expanded. Also the list is starting to become rather long so a good improvement would be to find a way to shorten the article whilst retaining the information provided.
Rillington (
talk) 13:44, 20 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
SpartazHumbug! 17:51, 26 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete and form into a category, as I believe would work better than such a lengthy list. –
DarkGlow (
talk) 19:01, 26 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment How so? Wouldn't doing that remove all of the information contained in the article?
Rillington (
talk) 17:47, 27 December 2019 (UTC)reply
I have to admit that the comment "form into a category" sounded a lot smarter to me when I wrote it than now when I read it, but my position on the article hasn't changed.--
Paul McDonald (
talk) 20:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:21, 2 January 2020 (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.
Weak keep - The
List of ESPN College Football personalities is a different list that does not contain the Basketball broadcast teams. Teams on ESPN meet the General notability guideline.--
23mason (
talk) 16:27, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
KEEP Its a valid list. You can also merge the other list to this one. The way this one is arranged is far more useful for sorting information.
DreamFocus 20:28, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Listcruft and the entire topic (broadcaster teams through history) isn't discussed significantly be reliable sources. « Gonzo fan2007(talk) @ 20:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete Wikipedia is not a database. Due to its size, this grouping of articles is better handled as a category.--
Paul McDonald (
talk) 20:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Keep Valid and useful list which does contain some independent references although the variety of reference sources could be expanded. Also the list is starting to become rather long so a good improvement would be to find a way to shorten the article whilst retaining the information provided.
Rillington (
talk) 13:44, 20 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
SpartazHumbug! 17:51, 26 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete and form into a category, as I believe would work better than such a lengthy list. –
DarkGlow (
talk) 19:01, 26 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment How so? Wouldn't doing that remove all of the information contained in the article?
Rillington (
talk) 17:47, 27 December 2019 (UTC)reply
I have to admit that the comment "form into a category" sounded a lot smarter to me when I wrote it than now when I read it, but my position on the article hasn't changed.--
Paul McDonald (
talk) 20:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:21, 2 January 2020 (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.