Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Springfield (IL) Cardinals

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 the whole shebang. The issue of mergine can continue on the article's talk pages. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Springfield (IL) Cardinals

These teams are incarnations of the same franchise. As per some of the conversation here, these should be merged into the article of the current franchise, the Great Lakes Loons, with redirects for these five defunct teams. Muboshgu (talk) 04:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. —BRMo (talk) 11:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. I don't think the rule of "one article on the franchise" that is generally used for major league teams works well for the minor leagues. First, there's usually very little continuity - different players, different owners, different fan bases. To the extent that readers are interested in these articles (or editors are interested in expanding them), it's usually from the viewpoint of local history – what is the history of professional baseball in this city or town? Finally, for some historical teams and leagues, it is simply very difficult to sort out the history of which franchises descended from which. BRMo (talk) 11:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment While I understand your point, I think it should be more of a case by case basis. In this case, we're talking about a Class A franchise with some very brief stops. While they were in Springfield for 11 years, and were the Michigan Battle Cats for 7, I don't think that establishes much local history. Beyond that, they were the Battle Creek Yankees for two years, the Southwest Michigan Devil Rays for two years and the Madison Hatters for one year (and it says in the article they never intended to stay longer than one year). There's nothing in any of these articles to establish any sort of following, and there's no way there was a following in those brief stops. I still eel those stub articles would be just as useful merged into the "History" section of the active franchise page. --Muboshgu (talk) 13:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't disagree with merging the "Battle Cats," "Devil Rays," and "Yankees" articles with each other since they apparently all played in Battle Creek. But I'd oppose merging them with Great Lakes Loons, who play in Midland. For readers and editors approaching the topic as part of local history, it would be better not to merge across dispersed geographical areas such as Madison, Springfield, Battle Creek, and Midland. BRMo (talk) 00:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom, or keep as is. Isn't this at the wrong venue if the nom isn't asking for deletion? MfD or WP:MLB would be the right place to discuss this, since it's an editing issue, not a deletion issue.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:16, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I should've set it up as a merge. --Muboshgu (talk) 22:21, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as standalone articles. It would be confusing to merge, and not particularly helpful if a reader is trying to research the history of baseball in a particular region. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 20:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:38, 29 July 2009 (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.