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 14:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Blue Jays minor league players[edit]

(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) 05:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination Withdrawn It's snowing in here. Alex (talk) 09:41, 8 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) 06:14, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- 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. Alex (talk) 06:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per Spanneraol's reasoning. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 11:55, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep please do NOT remove these minor league player lists. They represent a place to start building an article in public (rather than somebody's sandbox) for a player who is likely to reach the majors, or a player who is on a top prospect list and may generate a viewer's interest. There are 30 lists containing similar data, and editors are happily keeping them up-to-date, so I think that these lists should be kept.

Oh and having all 30 lists represented as distict AfD items is the HEIGHT OF STUPIDITY. There should be one entry discussing this type of list, so that all thoughts are shared in one discussion topic not spread out over 30 (or duplicated in 30). Perhaps it's the way Wiki works, but <mutter> <mutter>. If it's true that this AfD nonsense was done because somebody was annoyed about having his/her changes backed out, then please BAN THAT INDIVIDUAL. This is the height of vandalism, IMO. Cpfan776 (talk) 13:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep - This mass AfD appears to be misplaced. VMS Mosaic (talk) 13:54, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. Spanneraol (talk) 14:28, 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) 15:19, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 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) 19:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This list as a whole fails WP:GNG. Furthermore, it's a case of WP:LISTCRUFT. The list is unmaintainable if we list every minor leaguer who has ever been in the Jays system. Tchaliburton (talk) 21:05, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The list does not, nor is it intended to, list every minor leaguer that has ever been in the Jays system. They are meant to list top prospects and 40 man roster players who have not yet played in the Majors. And they are being maintained just fine by the baseball project. Spanneraol (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So it's a listing of current players only? This doesn't seem encyclopedic. And again, it fails WP:GNG. Tchaliburton (talk) 22:32, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not true, the farm system of the Blue Jays is a concept that passes GNG. Spanneraol (talk) 22:40, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So create an article about it. That's not what this is. Tchaliburton (talk) 00:54, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and trout per Dirtlawyer, Spanneraol and others. Rlendog (talk) 23:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on a WP:POINTy nomination, per Dirtlawyer1. Ejgreen77 (talk) 03:17, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per above --Old Time Music Fan (talk) 02: 28, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination Withdrawn It's snowing in here. Alex (talk) 09:41, 8 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.