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 delete. Sandstein 19:07, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland Eagles

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Appears to fail WP:GNG with only WP:ROUTINE mentions, and every time it is in coverage of another team that happened to play them. The page was created under the assumption that, as they were playing in a self-professed professional league, that they too were a professional team that would receive significant independent coverage. However, they appear to have mainly been a travel-only team that played professional teams, while being itself semi-pro, hence why there appears to be no actual coverage this team in any of its incarnations. Neither name turns up significant coverage as Maryland or Washington (Washington Eagles is extremely hard to search due to very common usage, but nothing SIGCOV of this one turned up). This article sums up their existence "the Washington Eagles, exists solely to play when another team can’t make it to the game, McCarthy said". Yosemiter (talk) 16:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also related and unsourced (or at least no GNG sources):

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:40, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:40, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:40, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete semi-pro football teams typically do not qualify for inclusion because they tend to not have enough coverage to surpass WP:GNG or any other notability measure. That seems to be the case here as well. There are exceptions such as Pittsburgh Colts, Oklahoma Thunder, and a few others. This team does not seem to be one of those exceptions based on a lack of coverage. A long time ago we had a discussion about semi-pro teams that may be relevant.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:26, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all 3 None of these articles have any significant independent coverage or make any claim of notability. Existing is not sufficient to show notability. Papaursa (talk) 01:24, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no sign of notability for the team, and they've been in 3 leagues in 5 years so there's no redirect target. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:32, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all 3 per nom. Also, the discussion cited by Paul M (Wikipedia:WikiProject American football/Semi-professional football discussion) appears to reflect a consensus against such articles. Of course, consensus can change, but there is no GNG sourcing presented here to support the articles. Cbl62 (talk) 15:51, 29 September 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.