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. Chaser (talk) 04:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of pro snow boarders[edit]

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

This is a list with only three items in it. It is also completely unsourced, and it has no lead section. It's nothing but a table with three snowboarders, their sponsor, their gender, and their nickname. The three snowboarders are notable themselves and in fact they're already in the project. The way the information is presented is odd and the information itself is redundant. The information it contains can easily be found elsewhere on Wikipedia. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msg • changes) 21:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. (GregJackP (talk) 02:07, 27 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Comment I'd encourage the author to move this to his/her own user page and work on it. It's always a bad idea to post a "work in progress" as a new article. I'm assuming that the author intended to have more than three names on the list, but the third one might as well have been sponsored by "Nominate this". So far as I can tell, we don't have an article (or even a category) for professional snow boarders, although I figure that all of the notable ones are sponsored. I like the way that the list is organized, but it needs to be sourced (look at that magazine over on your desk, underneath the newspaper). Mandsford (talk) 16:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Nomination doesn't give a legitimate reason for deletion. Lists are an appropriate, useful and widely used means of organising information for readers. The relevant category - Category:Snowboarders - indicates that this list can be populated. SilkTork *^YES! 22:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. SilkTork is exactly right. No valid reason for deletion has been offered, and one does not seem readily apparent. This is a matter for editing, although there is no reason it couldn't be userified as Mandsford mentions. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 01:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to List of snowboarders, as our threshold is notability, not being paid. Jujutacular ^T · C 02:32, 4 April 2010 (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.