Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kansas City Royals minor league players

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 keep. Wizardman 15:11, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kansas City Royals minor league players

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

To qualify for this page, a player must pass GNG. If they pass GNG, then they qualify for a standalone article. That makes this page unnecessary and redundant. Alex (talk) 05:57, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep. Nominators rationale makes no sense and is his trying to make a point after he tried to add minor players to these pages and was reverted. A list page has different notability requirements than an article. These articles are about the farm system, a notable subject and contain the entire rosters.Spanneraol (talk) 06:15, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not trying to make a point. I'm just following the consensus established by numerous Wikipedian members that a player must meet GNG to be on this page. It's spelled out in my rationale above. The actions claimed to have precipitated this happened months ago and have not influenced this AfD. Alex (talk) 06:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The pages are not "unnecessary" as they have all the rosters on them which aids in updating and they are also the only place on the net where you can see all the players on one page.. so it is certainly not "redundant"... your rationale is just plain dumb. Nominating all these articles separately is the definition of disrupting wikipedia to make a point.Spanneraol (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:CSC #2. VMS Mosaic (talk) 13:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Spanneraol (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Alex is being WP:POINTy and I've already WP:TROUTed him. We have a long standing consensus on how to do this that he doesn't seem to comprehend, and now he's wasting our time and resources on this farce. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:03, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The listed minor league baseball players are those who have been determined to be of some measure of notability under the general notability guidelines per WP:GNG, but WP:BASEBALL and the larger community believe would be better served by inclusion in an "incubator" list article such as this one. The Wikipedia community, WP:BASEBALL, and/or the participants in this AfD may "conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article," and that the subject matter may be better covered as part of another article per GNG. This is just such a case: KEEP. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:48, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and trout per Dirtlawyer, Spanneraol and others. Rlendog (talk) 23:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on a WP:POINTy nomination, per Dirtlawyer1. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:24, 6 November 2014 (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.