- 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 of the debate was DELETE. When the only keep votes are from User:Trollderella, an otherwise fine user who votes keep on nearly everything, and an obvious sock puppet, I feel confident to delete this article. — JIP | Talk 19:04, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable neo-sport. Delete. It looks like "intense frisbee" is sort of a neologism, or a game that this user created out of thin air. No google hits for the sport as a discrete sport. Some google hits randomly for "intense frisbee", typically describing people vigorously playing frisbee. —Gaff ταλκ 03:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- See also Intense Disc. Comment please be nice to the user who posted both Intense frisbee and Intense Disc. He or she is clearly a newbie. Clearly enthusiatic about this new sport. It may not be up to WP snuff for an article, but the user is acting in good faith. I suggested that they consider a homepage or blog to publicize the new sport. thanks.—Gaff ταλκ 03:20, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Please see my other comment below as well. This may be an inclusionists best dream. A group of kids (or maybe just one kid) decide to put an interesting twist on an already established game...Ultimate Frisbee. They change some rules around and rename it Intense frisbee or Intense Disc and create an article on it. The contributor admits to me when I ask him how wide spread the game is that it is not wide spread at all, not a league sport, not in existence completely as of yet (implying that he is still working out the finer points of the rules). But users here still argue that it should be kept! Or they at the most change their vote from keep to abstain. —Gaff ταλκ 01:22, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It's hard to tell how exactly how notable it is. My feeling is that some of the Google hits do reference more than just intensly played frisbee. Given the quality of the article, I'd prefer to give it the benefit of the doubt and vote
keep.GeorgeStepanek\talk 06:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC) Changed to abstain based on author's comments. GeorgeStepanek\talk 23:22, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]- can you give any links? I can't find any references that sound like what the articles describe. DDerby-(talk) 18:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. As usual, no deletion required. At worst, a redirect to frisbee will cause no harm. Trollderella 17:56, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you explain this argument further?—Gaff ταλκ 05:24, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination, not-notable local variation on a game, no indication of widespread use. From the article: "ending after a series of 3 thirty five minute quarters." What, not after five halves? Barno 20:20, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into ultimate frisbee. --howcheng [ talk • contribs • web ] 20:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I'm all for seeing WP flourish and do not consider myself a deletionist. But in this case, even the contributor recognizes that it is not that notable a sport. Here are comments he or she left on my talk page:—Gaff ταλκ 20:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the help. The sport isn't getting into the newspaper or anything, so I guess I should just let it be delted. And don't worry, you're not breaking my spirit, I just proabably need set up a homepage or something. Maybe just set up some basic rules so me and my friends can play a little bit more of a strict game or something. I play ultimate frisbee now, and I really enjoy it, somaybe it'll be a link page to that one day or something like that. Thanks for the help.
I actually don't see anything wrong with what he is saying. I myself play a sport similar to this in my town, except there are different names. I think he's done good explaining, and perhaps if more people come here it actually will turn into a real game. Give it time, I say keep. -Rick
- Keep I think that the kid is a newb, but the article does have some benifits to it. There is some evidence on Google that it is more than intense frisbee with a bunch of jocks running around. I say that we keep the article, or merge it with ultimate frisbee. The sport looks interesting enough. I say let's let the kid have this one articlee, but if he tries to make another dud liek this, I'm not having his back. *wink* -Smart Association 19:36, 25 October 2005
- NN, D. ComCat 00:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Changing my vote and striking all my comments above. Keep. If people want to make up new rules to games and change the name and then write encyclopedia articles on them, then I vote keep. There are worse things that people could be doing with WP.—Gaff ταλκ 01:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]- Delete as original research, since this is an attempt to propogate someone's new game, not describe a game people are actually playing in significant numbers. Good luck to the creator of the game, though; hopefully it will someday be popular enough to merit mention. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 12:43, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Incidentally, I fixed the formatting that was broken by Gaff striking all of his previous comments, and his last struck comment, as its statement of fact is worth mentioning, even if he's changed his mind. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 12:46, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- My comments are formatted how I want them. Please do not change.—Gaff ταλκ 03:54, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As an avid ultimate player, this is ultimate frisbee, only with some modifications and some new terms for standard disc throws (though most of the terms are also originally Ultimate terms. My college pickup games used a few modifications; it's not hard to modify the game. I don't find any relevant google hits. NN, OR. -DDerby-(talk) 18:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:NOR. Regional variation of a more established game and as the author himself has apparently admitted he agrees this is not a notable variation, I must vote delete. As a side note, there are lots of free webhosting solutions out there if the author wants to publicize his version and I wish him luck.--Isotope23 18:39, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, but gently. - brenneman(t)(c) 08:47, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom --JAranda | watz sup 23:47, 31 October 2005 (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.