Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014–15 NHL suspensions and fines

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. (non-admin closure) Ansh666 00:21, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2014–15 NHL suspensions and fines

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

This is just listcruft. Delete per WP:NOTSTATSBOOK. Tchaliburton (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Note: This debate has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 15:42, 29 August 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 15:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are six of these lists in Category:National Hockey League suspensions and fines. Is there a reason you singled this one out that distinguishes it from the others? postdlf (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know there were other problematic pages. In light of that I am also nominating the following related pages:

Tchaliburton (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Whichever way this turns out, it's better to discuss them as a group if the same rationale applies to them all equally. postdlf (talk) 23:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I am still trying to get my head around this particular set of lists, but my initial reaction is they are WP:TRIVIA. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of ice hockey-related deletion discussions. postdlf (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep carefully referenced lists which provide valuable historical information on the NHL's discipline system (all the more important for the last few years given the drastic changes relating to hits to the head). WP:NOTSTATSBOOK and WP:TRIVIA have been cited above as grounds for deletion but I don't see how they apply here. First, they're not really lists of statistics, they're lists of incidents primarily sorted by date and are similar to Nationwide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2012 which WP:NOTSTATSBOOK cites as an example of acceptable lists. As for WP:TRIVIA, the guideline describes it as lists of isolated information which clearly doesn't apply in the present case. Pichpich (talk) 20:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the pages include information that is substantive and relevant to the NHL's disclipline system. I don't think it's accurate to describe them as mere "lists" or "trivia" and they're not really stats, either. GLG GLG (talk) 22:11, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As noted by Pichpich, this is a carefully prepared list with well-defined criteria. Just because an article happens to be a list, doesn't make it "listcruft" (otherwise, we wouldn't have anything populating WP:FL). Canuck^{89 (talk to me)} 02:45, August 31, 2014 (UTC)
Comment. I ride the fence on this one somewhat. Everything I said in my keep rationale for the transactions AFD would apply here too. But in most cases, I think most suspensions and all fines are just a little more meaningless in the grand scheme of things. I find I am inclined to waste digital ink rather than cast a !vote. Reso lute 02:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A possible compromise is to keep the suspensions but forget about the fines which are indeed much less significant. Pichpich (talk) 19:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:TRIVIA. These list articles remind me of those (now deleted) succession boxes named Edmonton Oilers top scorer. Shall we next have articles listing NHL players skate sizes per season? GoodDay (talk) 11:15, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In agreement with Pichpich on his original argument. –B2Project^(Talk) 17:33, 4 September 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.